State v. . Helms

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. . Helms

137 S.E. 926, 193 N.C. 846, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 493

DecidedApril 27, 1927

StatusPublished

This text of 137 S.E. 926 (State v. . Helms) 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. . Helms, 137 S.E. 926, 193 N.C. 846, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 493 (N.C. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The only assignment of error discussed in the brief filed for defendant upon his appeal to this Court is based upon his exception to the refusal of his motion that the action be dismissed, for that there was no evidence in support of the testimony of prosecutrix as to at least two of the elements of the crime for which he was convicted. C. S., 4339. Assignments of error based upon other exceptions appearing in the record are abandoned. Rule 28.

We find no error in the refusal of the court to dismiss the action upon the contention made by defendant. There was evidence in support of the testimony of the prosecutrix as to each of the elements of the crime. This evidence, together with the testimony of the prosecutrix, was properly submitted to the jury. It is sufficient to sustain the verdict, and the judgment is affirmed.

No error.

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

Per Curiam.

The only assignment of error discussed in the brief filed for defendant upon his appeal to this Court is based upon his exception to the refusal of his motion that the action be dismissed, for that there was no evidence in support of the testimony of prosecutrix as to at least two of the elements of the crime for which he was convicted. C. S., 4339. Assignments of error based upon other exceptions appearing in the record are abandoned. Rule 28.

We find no error in the refusal of the court to dismiss the action upon the contention made by defendant. There was evidence in support of the testimony of the prosecutrix as to each of the elements of the crime. This evidence, together with the testimony of the prosecutrix, was properly submitted to the jury. It is sufficient to sustain the verdict, and the judgment is affirmed.

No error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 S.E. 926, 193 N.C. 846, 1927 N.C. LEXIS 493, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-helms-nc-1927.