State v. Coffey

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Coffey

188 S.E.2d 550, 14 N.C. App. 642, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 2204

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedMay 24, 1972

DocketNo. 7219SC194

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 188 S.E.2d 550 (State v. Coffey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Coffey, 188 S.E.2d 550, 14 N.C. App. 642, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 2204 (N.C. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

MALLARD, Chief Judge.

The evidence for the State tended to show that on the date alleged in the warrant the defendant was arrested while operating a motor vehicle on a public highway in Cabarrus County, and that at the time thereof he was under the influence of in[643]*643toxicating liquor. Approximately an hour after he was arrested, the defendant took a breathalyzer test that showed that the percentage of alcohol by weight in his blood was eighteen-hundredths percent. The defendant offered no evidence.

Defendant’s sole contention is that the judge of the superior court committed error in imposing a more severe sentence than that imposed in the recorder’s court. Defendant states in his brief that he is aware of the decision of the Supreme Court of North Carolina in State v. Speights, 280 N.C. 137, 185 S.E. 2d 152 (1971) holding that upon appeal to the superior court from the district court a defendant’s constitutional rights are not violated by the imposition of a greater sentence after conviction in superior court than that imposed in the district court. The defendant argues, however, that this is contrary to the holding of the United States Supreme Court in the case of North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 23 L.Ed. 2d 656, 89 S.Ct. 2072 (1969). We do not agree. We hold that the rule set forth in Speights is applicable and controls. In the trial we find no error.

No error.

Judges Campbell and Brock concur.

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

MALLARD, Chief Judge.

The evidence for the State tended to show that on the date alleged in the warrant the defendant was arrested while operating a motor vehicle on a public highway in Cabarrus County, and that at the time thereof he was under the influence of in[643]*643toxicating liquor. Approximately an hour after he was arrested, the defendant took a breathalyzer test that showed that the percentage of alcohol by weight in his blood was eighteen-hundredths percent. The defendant offered no evidence.

Defendant’s sole contention is that the judge of the superior court committed error in imposing a more severe sentence than that imposed in the recorder’s court. Defendant states in his brief that he is aware of the decision of the Supreme Court of North Carolina in State v. Speights, 280 N.C. 137, 185 S.E. 2d 152 (1971) holding that upon appeal to the superior court from the district court a defendant’s constitutional rights are not violated by the imposition of a greater sentence after conviction in superior court than that imposed in the district court. The defendant argues, however, that this is contrary to the holding of the United States Supreme Court in the case of North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, 23 L.Ed. 2d 656, 89 S.Ct. 2072 (1969). We do not agree. We hold that the rule set forth in Speights is applicable and controls. In the trial we find no error.

No error.

Judges Campbell and Brock concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

188 S.E.2d 550, 14 N.C. App. 642, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 2204, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-coffey-ncctapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack