State v. Frazier

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Frazier

175 S.E.2d 377, 9 N.C. App. 44, 1970 N.C. App. LEXIS 1274

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedJuly 15, 1970

DocketNo. 708SC373

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 175 S.E.2d 377 (State v. Frazier) 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. Frazier, 175 S.E.2d 377, 9 N.C. App. 44, 1970 N.C. App. LEXIS 1274 (N.C. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Parker, J.

The court’s charge contained an instruction on the inference of guilt arising from possession of recently stolen [46]*46property. In this connection the court failed to require the jury to find from the evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt that the watches found on defendant’s person and the clocks and other property found in his residence were the same watches, clocks and property stolen from the premises of Kinston Building Supply Company. The inference of guilt arising from the possession of recently stolen property does not apply until the identity of the property is established. State v. Jackson, 274 N.C. 594, 164 S.E. 2d 369.

While there was ample evidence in this case from which the jury could have found the identity of the property involved, for the failure of the judge to require the State to carry the burden of showing the identity of the stolen property, the defendant is entitled to a

New trial.

Campbell and Vaughn, JJ., concur.

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

Parker, J.

The court’s charge contained an instruction on the inference of guilt arising from possession of recently stolen [46]*46property. In this connection the court failed to require the jury to find from the evidence and beyond a reasonable doubt that the watches found on defendant’s person and the clocks and other property found in his residence were the same watches, clocks and property stolen from the premises of Kinston Building Supply Company. The inference of guilt arising from the possession of recently stolen property does not apply until the identity of the property is established. State v. Jackson, 274 N.C. 594, 164 S.E. 2d 369.

While there was ample evidence in this case from which the jury could have found the identity of the property involved, for the failure of the judge to require the State to carry the burden of showing the identity of the stolen property, the defendant is entitled to a

New trial.

Campbell and Vaughn, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

175 S.E.2d 377, 9 N.C. App. 44, 1970 N.C. App. LEXIS 1274, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-frazier-ncctapp-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack