State v. Lang
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
COPELAND, Justice.
By his nineteenth assignment of error, defendant contends that the trial court erred in refusing the jury’s request, after beginning its deliberations, to have the transcript of the testimony of defendant’s witness Ms. Rena James read to it. We hold that the trial judge’s refusal on the grounds that he did not have the authority, in his discretion, to grant the jury’s request was prejudicial error entitling defendant to a new trial.
It is well settled in this jurisdiction that the decision whether to grant or refuse a request by the jury, after beginning its deliberations,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State v. FulcherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
- Calloway v. Ford Motor CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- People v. QueenIllinois Supreme Court · 1974
- People v. AutmanIllinois Supreme Court · 1974
- State v. HoughSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by64 opinions
- State v. BensonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
- State v. AsheSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
- State v. AbrahamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1994
- State v. LawrenceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2000
- State v. McAvoySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1992
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.