State v. Hogsed

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Hogsed

165 S.E.2d 18, 3 N.C. App. 481, 1969 N.C. App. LEXIS 1607

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedJanuary 15, 1969

DocketNo. 6829SC454

StatusPublished

This text of 165 S.E.2d 18 (State v. Hogsed) 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. Hogsed, 165 S.E.2d 18, 3 N.C. App. 481, 1969 N.C. App. LEXIS 1607 (N.C. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

MORRIS, J.

The brief of the defendant appellant does not comply with the provisions of Rule 28 of the Rules of Practice in the Court of Appeals in that it does not contain, properly numbered, the several grounds of exception and assignment of error with reference to the pages of the record, and the authorities relied on, classified under each assignment. Rule 48 of the Rules of Practice in the Court of Appeals reads: “If these rules are not complied with, the appeal may be dismissed.” This case is, therefore, subject to dismissal for failure to comply with the rules. The Attorney General has made a motion to dismiss on the grounds of this failure to comply with the rules. State v. Floyd, 241 N.C. 79, 84 S.E. 2d 299; Shepard v. Oil & Fuel Co., 242 N.C. 762, 89 S.E. 2d 464.

However, instead of dismissing it, we have examined the exceptions and assignments of error in the record and find no prejudicial [482]*482error. The issue was primarily one of fact, and the jury’s verdict was against the defendant.

No error.

MallaRD, C.J., and Campbell, J., concur.

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

MORRIS, J.

The brief of the defendant appellant does not comply with the provisions of Rule 28 of the Rules of Practice in the Court of Appeals in that it does not contain, properly numbered, the several grounds of exception and assignment of error with reference to the pages of the record, and the authorities relied on, classified under each assignment. Rule 48 of the Rules of Practice in the Court of Appeals reads: “If these rules are not complied with, the appeal may be dismissed.” This case is, therefore, subject to dismissal for failure to comply with the rules. The Attorney General has made a motion to dismiss on the grounds of this failure to comply with the rules. State v. Floyd, 241 N.C. 79, 84 S.E. 2d 299; Shepard v. Oil & Fuel Co., 242 N.C. 762, 89 S.E. 2d 464.

However, instead of dismissing it, we have examined the exceptions and assignments of error in the record and find no prejudicial [482]*482error. The issue was primarily one of fact, and the jury’s verdict was against the defendant.

No error.

MallaRD, C.J., and Campbell, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

165 S.E.2d 18, 3 N.C. App. 481, 1969 N.C. App. LEXIS 1607, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hogsed-ncctapp-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack