State v. Peterson
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
HUNTER, Robert C., Judge.
The State appeals from the order granting defendant’s motion for appropriate relief, vacating defendant’s conviction, and granting him a new trial. On appeal, the State argues that the trial court erred by granting defendant a new trial because the evidence was cumulative, *341constituted nothing more than impeachment evidence, and had no probable impact on the jury’s verdict. In the alternative, the State also contends that the trial court erred by not allowing the State to ask questions or present evidence related to materiality at the motion for appropriate relief…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- State v. HennisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
- State v. StevensSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
- State v. PriceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1992
- State v. PetersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2007
- State v. WigginsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1993
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- State v. HowardCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
- State v. StubbsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2014
- Krueger v. North Carolina Criminal Justice Education & Training Standards CommissionCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2013
- State v. ToddCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
- State v. SpruiellCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2017
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.