Legal Opinion

State v. Beaver

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 4, 1976No. 36PublishedCited by 52 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MOORE, Justice.

Defendant first challenges the sufficiency of the bill of indictment, contending that the indictment was defective for two reasons: (1) that the house was not sufficiently described, and (2) that ownership was alleged in VanPelt, when actually the property belonged to Barber Scotia College. Defendant made no motion to quash the bill of indictment. Ordinarily, motions to quash after the evidence is in come too late. State v. Walker, 251 N.C. 465, 112 S.E. 2d 61 (1960). However, under Rule 10(a) of the Rules of Appellate Procedure, 287 N.C. 671, 698, upon appeal, any party may…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. State v. SparrowSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  2. State v. BrittSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  3. State v. AccorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  4. State v. DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  5. State v. . CaseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931

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

3Cited by52 opinions

  1. Sharpe v. BellCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2010
  2. State v. BrittSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
  3. State v. PridgenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
  4. State v. FreemanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
  5. State v. SaulsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976

47 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