State v. Day

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. Day

150 S.E.2d 863, 268 N.C. 464, 1966 N.C. LEXIS 1235

DecidedNovember 9, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 150 S.E.2d 863 (State v. Day) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court 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. Day, 150 S.E.2d 863, 268 N.C. 464, 1966 N.C. LEXIS 1235 (N.C. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Each of the assignments of error brought forward in defendants’ brief has been carefully considered. Defendants’ contention in respect of each assignment is fully considered [466]*466and answered in the Attorney General’s brief. Suffice to say, none of the assignments discloses prejudicial error or presents a question of sufficient merit to require or warrant discussion. The jury, on un-contradicted evidence, found the alleged (serious and despicable) crime was committed; and, on conflicting evidence, found said crime was committed by these defendants.

No error.

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

Per Curiam.

Each of the assignments of error brought forward in defendants’ brief has been carefully considered. Defendants’ contention in respect of each assignment is fully considered [466]*466and answered in the Attorney General’s brief. Suffice to say, none of the assignments discloses prejudicial error or presents a question of sufficient merit to require or warrant discussion. The jury, on un-contradicted evidence, found the alleged (serious and despicable) crime was committed; and, on conflicting evidence, found said crime was committed by these defendants.

No error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

150 S.E.2d 863, 268 N.C. 464, 1966 N.C. LEXIS 1235, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-day-nc-1966.