Legal Opinion

State v. Stroud

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided December 31, 1985No. 858SC578PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WHICHARD, Judge.

Defendant moved to suppress any statements she made to any investigating officer. After presentation of evidence and arguments of counsel on voir dire, but before the court ruled on the motion, the State moved to reopen the evidence for the limited purpose of offering testimony with respect to the nature of the rights furnished by the investigating officer to the defendant under the Miranda decision. The court, over defendant’s objection, allowed the motion. Defendant contends this was error.

N.C. Gen. Stat. 15A-1226(b) provides: “The judge in his discretion may permit any…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. State v. CallowaySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  2. State v. SmallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
  3. State v. McGuireSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  4. State v. JacksonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  5. State v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. WorthingtonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
  2. State v. DegreeCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
  3. State v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
  4. Oraefo v. PoundsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2014
  5. Vestal v. CAPITAL MARBLE CREATIONS, INC.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API