Legal Opinion

State v. Young

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided July 6, 1982No. 8118SC1296PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HEDRICK, Judge.

The first assignment of error argued in defendant’s brief is “the trial court’s denial of defendant’s Motion to Suppress the out-of-court photographic identification of the defendant” by the prosecuting witness. Defendant contends that the out-of-court identification was the product of an impermissibly suggestive photographic identification procedure. Since no evidence was presented at trial that defendant was identified at this pre-trial photographic identification session, then even if the procedure was impermissibly suggestive, its only relevance for defendant’s appeal would…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Delaware Republican State Committee v. RedfearnSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. State v. KingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  3. State v. BushSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  4. State v. ThompsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  5. State v. GriffinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Cameron v. New Hanover Memorial Hospital, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
  2. State v. McNeilCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
  3. State v. EssickCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API