State v. Kennedy

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Kennedy

209 S.E.2d 838, 23 N.C. App. 743, 1974 N.C. App. LEXIS 2211

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedNovember 20, 1974

DocketNo. 745SC792

StatusPublished

This text of 209 S.E.2d 838 (State v. Kennedy) 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. Kennedy, 209 S.E.2d 838, 23 N.C. App. 743, 1974 N.C. App. LEXIS 2211 (N.C. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

MARTIN, Judge.

Counsel for defendant admits he is unable to find prejudicial error committed at trial but urges this Court to hold G.S. 14-177 unconstitutionally vague. We have reviewed the record and also find no prejudicial error. Furthermore, we reaffirm State v. Moles, 17 N.C. App. 664, 195 S.E. 2d 352 (1973) where this Court upheld the validity of G.S. 14-177. In Perkins v. State of North Carolina, 234 F. Supp. 333 (1964), Chief Judge Craven also upheld the validity of this ! statute against an attack for vagueness by reading the statute in light of North Carolina Supreme Court interpretations thereof.

No error.

Chief Judge Brock and Judge Parker concur.

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

MARTIN, Judge.

Counsel for defendant admits he is unable to find prejudicial error committed at trial but urges this Court to hold G.S. 14-177 unconstitutionally vague. We have reviewed the record and also find no prejudicial error. Furthermore, we reaffirm State v. Moles, 17 N.C. App. 664, 195 S.E. 2d 352 (1973) where this Court upheld the validity of G.S. 14-177. In Perkins v. State of North Carolina, 234 F. Supp. 333 (1964), Chief Judge Craven also upheld the validity of this ! statute against an attack for vagueness by reading the statute in light of North Carolina Supreme Court interpretations thereof.

No error.

Chief Judge Brock and Judge Parker concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 S.E.2d 838, 23 N.C. App. 743, 1974 N.C. App. LEXIS 2211, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-kennedy-ncctapp-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack