State v. . Craft

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. . Craft

146 S.E. 926, 196 N.C. 826, 1929 N.C. LEXIS 124

Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided March 6, 1929·Published

Opinion

Pee Cueiam.

At the' close of the State’s evidence and at the close of all the evidence, both the defendants made motions for judgment of *827 nonsuit. C. S., 4643. The defendant, J. E. Craft, did not offer any evidence. The defendants’ exceptions and assignments of error present the sole question as to whether or not on all the evidence it was sufficient to be submitted to a jury. We think so.

The evidence was circumstantial, but sufficient to have been submitted to the jury; the probative force was for them to determine. S. v. Lawrence, ante, 562. We find in law

No error.

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

Pee Cueiam.

At the' close of the State’s evidence and at the close of all the evidence, both the defendants made motions for judgment of *827 nonsuit. C. S., 4643. The defendant, J. E. Craft, did not offer any evidence. The defendants’ exceptions and assignments of error present the sole question as to whether or not on all the evidence it was sufficient to be submitted to a jury. We think so.

The evidence was circumstantial, but sufficient to have been submitted to the jury; the probative force was for them to determine. S. v. Lawrence, ante, 562. We find in law

No error.

State v. . Craft, 146 S.E. 926, 196 N.C. 826, 1929 N.C. LEXIS 124 (N.C. 1929).

Pincite

146 S.E. 926 (State v. . Craft) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.