Legal Opinion

State v. Barrow

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 7, 1977No. 76PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HUSKINS, Justice.

Defendant first assigns as error the failure of the trial court to grant her motion for “judgment of acquittal” at the end of the State’s evidence and at the conclusion of all the evidence.

Although we are unable to find mention of such a motion in our criminal procedure, it is apparent that defendant is attacking the sufficiency of the evidence to go to the jury. Therefore, for purposes of this appeal, defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal — like a motion for “a directed verdict of not guilty,” State v. Holton, 284 N.C. 391, 200 S.E. 2d 612 (1973) — will be treated as…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. State v. BentonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  2. State v. McKinneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  3. State v. McWilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  4. State v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
  5. State v. DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
  2. State v. NewmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  3. State v. SheltonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
  4. State v. MelvinCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
  5. State v. DeBerryCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978

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