State v. Copeland

199 S.E.2d 448, 284 N.C. 108, 1973 N.C. LEXIS 782
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided October 10, 1973·No. No. 10·Published

Opinion

HUSKINS, Justice.

The case on appeal contains no assignments of error. In the brief, defense counsel states that he is unable to find prejudicial error but has perfected the appeal to the end that this Court may examine the entire record.

The appeal itself is considered an exception to the judgment and presents for review any error appearing on the face of the record proper. State v. Cox, 281 N.C. 131, 187 S.E. 2d 785 (1972); State v. Elliott, 269 N.C. 683, 153 S.E. 2d 330 (1967). Unless error appears on the face of the record proper, the judgment will be sustained. State v. Bumgarner, 283 N.C. 388, 196 S.E. 2d 210 (1973); State v. Williams, 268 N.C. 295, 150 S.E. 2d 447 (1966).

Ordinarily, the record proper in criminal cases consists of (1) the organization of the court, (2) the charge (information, warrant or indictment), (3) the arraignment and plea, (4) the verdict, and (5) the judgment. State v. Tinsley, 279 N.C. 482, 183 S.E. 2d 669 (1971); State v. McClain, 282 N.C. 357, 198 S.E. 2d 108 (1972).

A careful examination of the record proper reveals no error. Evidence of defendant’s guilt is overwhelming. In the trial, verdict and judgment we find

No. error.

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

State v. Copeland, 199 S.E.2d 448, 284 N.C. 108, 1973 N.C. LEXIS 782 (N.C. 1973).

199 S.E.2d 448 (State v. Copeland) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Elliott
153 S.E.2d 330 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1967)
State v. Williams
150 S.E.2d 447 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1966)
State v. Bumgarner
196 S.E.2d 210 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1973)
State v. McClain
193 S.E.2d 108 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1972)
State v. Tinsley
183 S.E.2d 669 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1971)
State v. Cox
187 S.E.2d 785 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1972)
State v. Harris
198 S.E.2d 108 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1973)