In re Eldridge

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

In re Eldridge

177 S.E.2d 313, 9 N.C. App. 723, 1970 N.C. App. LEXIS 1454

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedNovember 18, 1970

DocketNo. 7021DC544

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 177 S.E.2d 313 (In re Eldridge) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Eldridge, 177 S.E.2d 313, 9 N.C. App. 723, 1970 N.C. App. LEXIS 1454 (N.C. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

GRAHAM, Judge.

It is the constant duty of the District Court “to give each child subject to its jurisdiction such oversight and control as will conduce to the welfare of the child and to the best interest of the State.” In re Burma, 275 N.C. 517, 169 S.E. 2d 879. It' appears that the juvenile here was carefully afforded all constitutional safeguards at every stage of the three separate hearings. In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 25 L.Ed. 2d 368, 90 S.Ct. 1068; In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 18 L. Ed. 2d 527, 87 S.Ct. 1428. Appellant’s contention that the order of 12 June 1970 is unsupported by evidence and based upon improper conclusions is overruled. In all the proceedings affecting this juvenile we find no prejudicial error.

No error.

Judges Brock and Morris concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

GRAHAM, Judge.

It is the constant duty of the District Court “to give each child subject to its jurisdiction such oversight and control as will conduce to the welfare of the child and to the best interest of the State.” In re Burma, 275 N.C. 517, 169 S.E. 2d 879. It' appears that the juvenile here was carefully afforded all constitutional safeguards at every stage of the three separate hearings. In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 25 L.Ed. 2d 368, 90 S.Ct. 1068; In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 18 L. Ed. 2d 527, 87 S.Ct. 1428. Appellant’s contention that the order of 12 June 1970 is unsupported by evidence and based upon improper conclusions is overruled. In all the proceedings affecting this juvenile we find no prejudicial error.

No error.

Judges Brock and Morris concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

177 S.E.2d 313, 9 N.C. App. 723, 1970 N.C. App. LEXIS 1454, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-eldridge-ncctapp-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack