State v. King

Denny, E.J.

The defendant argues and contends that since the case in which the perjured testimony is alleged to have been given was nonsuited on appeal to this Court — State v. King, 264 N.C. 578, 142 S.E. 2d 130, it is immaterial whether Harris’ testimony in that case was material or immaterial to the issue involved. There is no merit in this contention. If, in the trial of King at the March Criminal Session 1965, in the Superior Court of Alamance County, Harris had not sworn that the whiskey involved was his whiskey and not King’s, the ultimate result in that case might have been different.…