State v. Hough

743 S.E.2d 174, 367 N.C. 79, 2013 WL 3325154, 2013 N.C. LEXIS 659
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided June 27, 2013·No. 141PA10·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Justice JACKSON took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. The remaining members of the Court are equally divided, with three members voting to affirm and three members voting to reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals. Accordingly, the decision of the Court of Appeals is left undisturbed and stands without precedential value. See, e.g., Amward Homes, Inc. v. Town of Cary, 365 N.C. 305, 716 S.E.2d 849 (2011); Goldston v. State, 364 N.C. 416, 700 S.E.2d 223 (2010).

AFFIRMED.

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

State v. Hough, 743 S.E.2d 174, 367 N.C. 79, 2013 WL 3325154, 2013 N.C. LEXIS 659 (N.C. 2013).

743 S.E.2d 174 (State v. Hough) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Goldston v. State
700 S.E.2d 223 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 2010)
Amward Homes, Inc. v. Town of Cary
716 S.E.2d 849 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 2011)
Amward Homes, Inc. v. Town of Cary
716 S.E.2d 849 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 2011)