Legal Opinion

State v. Ruof

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 16, 1979No. 15PublishedCited by 45 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BRANCH, Justice.

Defendant assigns as error the failure of the trial judge to grant his motion in limine. The thrust of the motion was to prohibit any comment regarding defendant’s association with “The Outlaws” motorcycle club. The trial judge considered the written motion and stated that he would rule on it “at the appropriate time during the course of the trial.”

Generally, a motion in limine seeks to secure in advance of trial the exclusion of prejudicial matter. North Carolina has no statutory provisions for such a motion, and it is rarely if ever used in this State. In those jurisdictions…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Mullaney v. WilburSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. State v. CovingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  3. State v. WestbrookSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  4. State v. FaustSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  5. State v. . BensonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1922

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

3Cited by45 opinions

  1. Hoops v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1996
  2. State v. PinchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  3. State v. AlstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  4. State v. MasonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
  5. State v. GoodeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1995

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

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

Powered by the Exa API