State v. Mead
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
646 S.E.2d 597 (2007)
STATE of North Carolina
v.
James Allen MEAD.
No. COA06-1116.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina.
July 3, 2007.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Philip A. Lehman, for the State.
Cheshire, Parker, Schneider, Bryan & Vitale, by John Keating Wiles, Raleigh, for defendant-appellant.
WYNN, Judge.
To disturb a sentence imposed by a trial court, a defendant must show an "abuse of discretion, procedural conduct prejudicial to defendant, circumstances which manifest inherent unfairness and injustice, or conduct which offends the public sense of fair play."[1] Here,…
Also in this document: Concurring in part, dissenting in part.
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Berman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- State v. CummingsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2000
- State v. PopeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
- State v. AtkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1998
- State v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2000
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.