State v. Brock
67 S.E.2d 282, 234 N.C. 390, 1951 N.C. LEXIS 469
Opinion
This Court is of the opinion unanimously that defendant’s plea of former jeopardy was properly denied. S. v. Dove, 222 N.C. 162, 22 S.E. 2d 231; S. v. Guice, 201 N.C. 761, 161 S.E. 533. But the members of the Court are evenly divided in opinion (Justice Valentine not sitting) whether error in the admission of testimony as to declarations and conduct of Jim Cook in the absence of the defendant was prejudicial requiring a new trial. Hence the judgment of the Superior Court must stand affirmed, without becoming a precedent.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Brock, 67 S.E.2d 282, 234 N.C. 390, 1951 N.C. LEXIS 469 (N.C. 1951).
67 S.E.2d 282 (State v. Brock) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. Allen
100 S.E.2d 333 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1957)
Brock v. North Carolina
344 U.S. 424 (Supreme Court, 1953)
State v. Brock
67 S.E.2d 282 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1951)