Legal Opinion

State v. . Kluttz

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 20, 1934PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Stacy, O. J.,

after stating tbe case: Tbe wife of tbe defendant Kluttz was not competent to give evidence against ber busband, in a prosecution like tbe present, C. S., 1802, and it was error as to bim to permit ber to do so. S. v. Ashwell, 193 N. C., 399, 137 S. E., 174; S. v. Reid, 178 N. C., 745, 101 S. E., 104; S. v. Raby, 121 N. C., 682, 28 S. E., 490; S. v. Harbison, 94 N. C., 885. See, also, S. v. Spivey, 151 N. C., 678, 65 S. E., 995, and S. v. Cox, 150 N. C., 846, 64 S. E., 199.

It was also error, wbicb entitles tbe defendant Rorie to a new trial, to permit tbe witness Scott to testify…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Queen v. HepburnSupreme Court of the United States · 1813
  2. State v. . SpiveySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
  3. State v. . LassiterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  4. Bradley v. Ohio River & Charleston Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1900
  5. Smith v. . MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Cole v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  2. State v. WarrenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  3. Nowell v. . BasnightSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
  4. State v. ColeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  5. State v. ReavisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1973

5 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