Legal Opinion

State v. Craven

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 8, 1985No. 123A84PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MARTIN, Justice.

The first question for review is whether the trial court erred by permitting seven-year-old Lee Burns to testify that defendant kissed him in the mouth and touched him on his penis and behind several times during the spring of 1983. During his cross-examination of Peter Brim, defendant attempted to elicit testimony that defendant may have inadvertently touched Peter’s penis while bathing him or while drying him after a bath. To counter this the state offered Lee Burns’s testimony for the purpose of showing defendant’s mens rea for the crimes with which he was charged in the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. State v. McClainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  2. State v. PotterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  3. State v. BooneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  4. State v. McCoySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  5. State v. McDowellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. ChandlerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
  2. State v. PriceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
  3. State v. ConnellCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1997
  4. State v. PottsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1993
  5. State v. ScottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1992

3 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