Legal Opinion

State v. Gurkin

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided May 27, 1970No. 7017SC157PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrock, J.

Defendants undertake to assign as error the in-court identification of the three defendants; they argue that the in-court identification was tainted by an illegal in-custody pre-trial confrontation. Not one of the three defendants objected to or moved to strike the in-court identification; on appeal they have raised the question for the first time. At trial defendants did not indicate in any way that they desired an examination of the witness and findings by the trial judge upon the question; they were content to allow the witness to identify defendants, and they cannot successfully raise…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. Marshall Norman HicksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  2. State v. LentzSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  3. State v. MartinCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1968
  4. State v. JonesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. McIntyreCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1972
  2. State v. CoatsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  3. State v. ColeyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974
  4. State v. CoatsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  5. State v. HudsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1973

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

Powered by the Exa API