State v. Chappell

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Chappell

208 S.E.2d 508, 23 N.C. App. 228, 1974 N.C. App. LEXIS 2060

Court of Appeals of North Carolina·Decided October 2, 1974·No. No. 749SC702·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

VAUGHN, Judge.

Defendant’s court appointed counsel contends that it was error for the judge to fail to instruct the jury that they were to use their own memory in recalling the evidence and that they were not to take his recapitulation of the evidence as fact. Defendant did not request the Court to give that instruction and it is not required in the absence of a request. State v. Harris, 213 N.C. 648, 197 S.E. 142.

Defendant has brought forward other assignments of error which we find to be without merit. We find no prejudicial error in defendant’s trial.

No error.

Judges Campbell and Parker concur.

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

VAUGHN, Judge.

Defendant’s court appointed counsel contends that it was error for the judge to fail to instruct the jury that they were to use their own memory in recalling the evidence and that they were not to take his recapitulation of the evidence as fact. Defendant did not request the Court to give that instruction and it is not required in the absence of a request. State v. Harris, 213 N.C. 648, 197 S.E. 142.

Defendant has brought forward other assignments of error which we find to be without merit. We find no prejudicial error in defendant’s trial.

No error.

Judges Campbell and Parker concur.

State v. Chappell, 208 S.E.2d 508, 23 N.C. App. 228, 1974 N.C. App. LEXIS 2060 (N.C. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

208 S.E.2d 508 (State v. Chappell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related