State v. Gordon

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Gordon

189 S.E.2d 550, 15 N.C. App. 241, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 1885

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedJune 28, 1972

DocketNo. 7217SC452

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 189 S.E.2d 550 (State v. Gordon) 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. Gordon, 189 S.E.2d 550, 15 N.C. App. 241, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 1885 (N.C. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

VAUGHN, Judge.

Defendant contends that the trial court erred in refusing to grant his petition for a new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence. Appeal does not lie from a refusal to grant a new trial for newly discovered evidence. State v. Thomas, 227 N.C. 71, 40 S.E. 2d 412; 3 Strong, N.C. Index 2d, Criminal Law, § 148. We have, however, treated defendant’s appeal as a petition for certiorari, which is allowed. The granting of a new trial based on newly discovered evidence rests within the sound discretion of the trial court, and its ruling thereon is not reviewable in the absence of a showing of abuse [242]*242of that discretion. State v. Williams, 244 N.C. 459, 94 S.E. 2d 374; State v. Blalock, 13 N.C. App. 711, 187 S.E. 2d 404. After having carefully reviewed the record in the case, we find no abuse of discretion. The order denying defendant’s petition is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Judges Morris and Graham concur.

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

VAUGHN, Judge.

Defendant contends that the trial court erred in refusing to grant his petition for a new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence. Appeal does not lie from a refusal to grant a new trial for newly discovered evidence. State v. Thomas, 227 N.C. 71, 40 S.E. 2d 412; 3 Strong, N.C. Index 2d, Criminal Law, § 148. We have, however, treated defendant’s appeal as a petition for certiorari, which is allowed. The granting of a new trial based on newly discovered evidence rests within the sound discretion of the trial court, and its ruling thereon is not reviewable in the absence of a showing of abuse [242]*242of that discretion. State v. Williams, 244 N.C. 459, 94 S.E. 2d 374; State v. Blalock, 13 N.C. App. 711, 187 S.E. 2d 404. After having carefully reviewed the record in the case, we find no abuse of discretion. The order denying defendant’s petition is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Judges Morris and Graham concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

189 S.E.2d 550, 15 N.C. App. 241, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 1885, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-gordon-ncctapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack