Home/Supreme Court of North Carolina/State v. Kinley

State v. Kinley

154 S.E.2d 95, 270 N.C. 296, 1967 N.C. LEXIS 1345
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMay 3, 1967
Docket258
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 154 S.E.2d 95 (State v. Kinley) 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. Kinley, 154 S.E.2d 95, 270 N.C. 296, 1967 N.C. LEXIS 1345 (N.C. 1967).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant contends there was error in admitting State’s Exhibit #2, the check writing machine, into evidence. The officer testified that the machine was in plain view and that he did not have to search to find the machine. In the case of State v. Giles, 254 N.C. 499, 119 S.E. 2d 394, Denny, J. (later C.J.), speaking for the Court, said:

“. . . . it is said in 47 Am. Jur., Searches and Seizures, section 20, page 516: ‘Where no search is required, the constitutional guaranty is not applicable. The guaranty applies only in those instances where the seizure is assisted by a necessary search. It does not prohibit a seizure without a warrant where there is no need of a search, and where the contraband subject matter is fully disclosed and open to the eye and hand.’ ”

Defendant further contends there is not sufficient evidence that *298 a forgery occurred in Mecklenburg County to repel his motion for nonsuit. The witness W. W. Turner identified the defendant and stated he was the person who signed the check cashed at Shuffle-town Grocery. This evidence in connection with the other circumstances furnished plenary evidence to justify the denial of defendant’s motion for nonsuit on the count of forgery.

We find no prejudicial error in the trial below.

No error.

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

Related

State v. Beveridge
436 S.E.2d 912 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1993)
State v. Bembery
234 S.E.2d 33 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1977)
State v. Smith
221 S.E.2d 247 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1976)
State v. Walker
212 S.E.2d 528 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1975)
State v. Allen
194 S.E.2d 9 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1973)
State v. Powell
181 S.E.2d 754 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1971)
State v. Duboise
181 S.E.2d 393 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1971)
State v. Simmons
178 S.E.2d 90 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1970)
State v. Virgil
172 S.E.2d 28 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1970)
State v. Robbins
169 S.E.2d 858 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1969)
State v. Colson
163 S.E.2d 376 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1968)
State v. Howard
162 S.E.2d 495 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1968)
State v. McCabe
162 S.E.2d 66 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1968)
State v. Colson
161 S.E.2d 637 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1968)
State v. Craddock
158 S.E.2d 25 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1967)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
154 S.E.2d 95, 270 N.C. 296, 1967 N.C. LEXIS 1345, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-kinley-nc-1967.