Legal Opinion

State v. Banks

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 24, 1965No. 86PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHiggins, J.

The warrant upon which the prosecution is based is before us as a part of the record proper. We are.charged with notice of its contents. If the warrant is insufficient on its face to state a criminal charge and support a conviction, the Court, ex mero mo tu, should so declare, and arrest the judgment. “It is an essential of jurisdiction that a criminal offense shall be sufficiently charged in a warrant or an indictment.” “. . . ‘The authorities are in unison that an indictment, ... to be good must- allege lucidly and accurately all the essential elements of the offense endeavored to be…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. ThorntonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  2. State v. BassSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  3. State v. BarnesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  4. State v. BivinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  5. State v. PetersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Matter of BanksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  2. State v. KirbySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  3. State v. PorthSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  4. State v. SwaneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  5. State v. ConradSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969

12 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