State v. Bumgarner
This text of 196 S.E.2d 210 (State v. Bumgarner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The record reveals that the defendant made three assignments of error; however, none of these were brought forward and argued by defendant in his brief. Assignments of error *390 which are not brought forward and discussed in the brief are deemed abandoned. State v. McLean, 282 N.C. 147, 191 S.E. 2d 598 (1972); State v. Wilson, 280 N.C. 674, 187 S.E. 2d 22 (1972); Branch v. State, 269 N.C. 642, 153 S.E. 2d 343 (1967); State v. Spears, 268 N.C. 303, 150 S.E. 2d 499 (1966); State v. Stafford, 267 N.C. 201, 147 S.E. 2d 925 (1966).
When the case on appeal contains no assignments of error, the judgment must be sustained unless error appears on the face of the record proper. State v. Higgs, 270 N.C. 111, 153 S.E. 2d 781 (1967); State v. Williams, 268 N.C. 295, 150 S.E. 2d 447 (1966). The defendant’s counsel candidly states: “The defendant’s counsel on appeal after thoroughly reviewing the record’s transcript of proceedings and the indictment herein is unable to detect any error in the defendant’s trial and respectfully requests the Court of Appeals to review same in order to assure that the defendant was given a fair trial free from prejudicial error.”
We have carefully reviewed the entire record and find no error.
No error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
196 S.E.2d 210, 283 N.C. 388, 1973 N.C. LEXIS 973, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-bumgarner-nc-1973.