State v. Dixon

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. Dixon

130 S.E.2d 333, 259 N.C. 249, 1963 N.C. LEXIS 534

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedApril 10, 1963

Docket292

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 130 S.E.2d 333 (State v. Dixon) 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. Dixon, 130 S.E.2d 333, 259 N.C. 249, 1963 N.C. LEXIS 534 (N.C. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

*251 Per Curiam.

There is no thaumaturgy which can transform into newly discovered evidence defendant’s ignorance at the time of his trial that the blood sample, about which he did not inquire, would not have been available if he had demanded it. The seven prerequisites to the granting of >a new trial for newly discovered evidence are listed seriatim by Stacy, C.J., in State v. Casey, 201 N.C. 620, 161 S.E. 81. Defendant meets not one of these requirements. Furthermore, a motion for a new trial upon the ground of newly discovered evidence is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court which is not reviewable in the absence of an abuse. State v. Williams, 244 N.C. 459, 94 S.E. 2d 374. Judge Paul’s ruling denying defendant’s motion both as a matter of right and in his discretion met the requirements of judicial decorum.

Appeal dismissed.

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

*251 Per Curiam.

There is no thaumaturgy which can transform into newly discovered evidence defendant’s ignorance at the time of his trial that the blood sample, about which he did not inquire, would not have been available if he had demanded it. The seven prerequisites to the granting of >a new trial for newly discovered evidence are listed seriatim by Stacy, C.J., in State v. Casey, 201 N.C. 620, 161 S.E. 81. Defendant meets not one of these requirements. Furthermore, a motion for a new trial upon the ground of newly discovered evidence is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court which is not reviewable in the absence of an abuse. State v. Williams, 244 N.C. 459, 94 S.E. 2d 374. Judge Paul’s ruling denying defendant’s motion both as a matter of right and in his discretion met the requirements of judicial decorum.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

130 S.E.2d 333, 259 N.C. 249, 1963 N.C. LEXIS 534, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-dixon-nc-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack