State v. Bailey

350 S.E.2d 94, 318 N.C. 652, 1986 N.C. LEXIS 2740
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided November 18, 1986·No. No. 380PA86·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We conclude that the State’s petition for discretionary review was improvidently allowed.

Petition for discretionary review improvidently allowed.

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

State v. Bailey, 350 S.E.2d 94, 318 N.C. 652, 1986 N.C. LEXIS 2740 (N.C. 1986).

350 S.E.2d 94 (State v. Bailey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Woody
477 S.E.2d 462 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1996)
State v. Frazier
464 S.E.2d 490 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1995)
State v. Smith
429 S.E.2d 425 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1993)
State v. Johnson
413 S.E.2d 562 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1992)
State v. Murphy
394 S.E.2d 300 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1990)
State v. Hewett
376 S.E.2d 467 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1989)
State v. Emery
370 S.E.2d 456 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1988)