Legal Opinion

State v. Sluka

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided August 4, 1992No. 916SC1018PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LEWIS, Judge.

Defendants first assign as error the denial of their motions to dismiss made at the close of the evidence. The question for the trial court upon a motion to dismiss is whether there is substantial evidence of each essential element of the offense charged and of the defendant’s being the perpetrator of the offense. State v. Malloy, 309 N.C. 176, 305 S.E.2d 718 (1983); State v. Earnhardt, 307 N.C. 62, 296 S.E.2d 649 (1982). If such evidence has been presented, the motion is properly denied. Earnhardt, 307 N.C. at 62, 296 S.E.2d at 652. In determining the sufficiency of the evidence…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. State v. EarnhardtSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  2. State v. MalloySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  3. State v. AdcockSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  4. Withers v. . LaneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
  5. State v. MainesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. JonesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  2. State v. NunezCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010
  3. State v. WoodardCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API