State v. Greene

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. Greene

258 S.E.2d 71, 298 N.C. 268, 1979 N.C. LEXIS 1354

Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided October 3, 1979·No. No. 6·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Justice Brock was absent on account of illness and did not participate in the consideration and decision of this case. The remaining six justices are equally divided as to whether the trial court prejudicially erred in refusing to excuse juror Raymond Simmons for cause, thus forcing defendant to use a peremptory challenge to remove him. In accordance with the usual practice and long established rule, this equal division requires that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed without becoming a precedent. Mortgage Co. v. Real Estate, Inc., 297 N.C. 696, 256 S.E. 2d 688 (1979); Townsend v. Railway Co., 296 N.C. 246, 249 S.E. 2d 801 (1978); Sharpe v. Pugh, 286 N.C. 209, 209 S.E. 2d 456 (1974); State v. Johnson, 286 N.C. 331, 210 S.E. 2d 260 (1974); Parrish v. [270] Publishing Company, 271 N.C. 711, 157 S.E. 2d 334 (1967); Burke v. R.R., 257 N.C. 683, 127 S.E. 2d 281 (1962); State v. Smith, 243 N.C. 172, 90 S.E. 2d 328 (1955); James v. Rogers, 231 N.C. 668, 58 S.E. 2d 640 (1950); Parsons v. Board of Education, 200 N.C. 88, 156 S.E. 244 (1930); Hillsboro v. Bank, 191 N.C. 828, 132 S.E. 657 (1926); McCarter v. Railway Co., 187 N.C. 863, 123 S.E. 88 (1924). It is so ordered, no error appearing with respect to the remaining assignments.

Affirmed.

Justice BROCK did not participate in the consideration and decision of this case.

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

PER CURIAM.

Justice Brock was absent on account of illness and did not participate in the consideration and decision of this case. The remaining six justices are equally divided as to whether the trial court prejudicially erred in refusing to excuse juror Raymond Simmons for cause, thus forcing defendant to use a peremptory challenge to remove him. In accordance with the usual practice and long established rule, this equal division requires that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed without becoming a precedent. Mortgage Co. v. Real Estate, Inc., 297 N.C. 696, 256 S.E. 2d 688 (1979); Townsend v. Railway Co., 296 N.C. 246, 249 S.E. 2d 801 (1978); Sharpe v. Pugh, 286 N.C. 209, 209 S.E. 2d 456 (1974); State v. Johnson, 286 N.C. 331, 210 S.E. 2d 260 (1974); Parrish v. [270] Publishing Company, 271 N.C. 711, 157 S.E. 2d 334 (1967); Burke v. R.R., 257 N.C. 683, 127 S.E. 2d 281 (1962); State v. Smith, 243 N.C. 172, 90 S.E. 2d 328 (1955); James v. Rogers, 231 N.C. 668, 58 S.E. 2d 640 (1950); Parsons v. Board of Education, 200 N.C. 88, 156 S.E. 244 (1930); Hillsboro v. Bank, 191 N.C. 828, 132 S.E. 657 (1926); McCarter v. Railway Co., 187 N.C. 863, 123 S.E. 88 (1924). It is so ordered, no error appearing with respect to the remaining assignments.

Affirmed.

Justice BROCK did not participate in the consideration and decision of this case.

State v. Greene, 258 S.E.2d 71, 298 N.C. 268, 1979 N.C. LEXIS 1354 (N.C. 1979).

Pincite

258 S.E.2d 71 (State v. Greene) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related