Home/Supreme Court of North Carolina/State v. Burton

State v. Burton

124 S.E.2d 108, 256 N.C. 464, 1962 N.C. LEXIS 452
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided February 28, 1962·No. 75·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The assignments of error are without merit. The crucial assignments relate to the admission of certain testimony of the arresting officer as to what Frank Burton told him in the absence of defendant. The only testimony of this character admitted and not *465 stricken was first elicited by defendant on cross-examination, and with respect to which there was no objection or exception. Furthermore, these assignments are not sufficient in form to present the errors relied on without the necessity of going beyond the assignments themselves to learn what the questions are. Rule 21, Rules of Practice in Supreme Court; Lowie & Co. v. Atkins, 245 N.C. 98, 95 S.E. 2d 271. See 1 Strong: N.C. Index, Appeal and Error, s. 19, p. 90.

The evidence is sufficient to support the verdict. The punishment is not in excess of that provided by law.

No error.

WiNBORN®, C.J., not sitting.

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

State v. Burton, 124 S.E.2d 108, 256 N.C. 464, 1962 N.C. LEXIS 452 (N.C. 1962).

124 S.E.2d 108 (State v. Burton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Rivers
380 S.E.2d 359 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1989)
State v. Brown
185 S.E.2d 486 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1971)
State v. Fletcher
181 S.E.2d 405 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1971)
State v. Cutshall
180 S.E.2d 745 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1971)
State v. Barrow
172 S.E.2d 512 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1970)
Kleinfeldt v. Shoney's of Charlotte, Inc.
127 S.E.2d 573 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1962)
State v. Gaskill
124 S.E.2d 873 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1962)