State v. Kistler

185 S.E.2d 596, 13 N.C. App. 431, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 2258
Court of Appeals of North Carolina·Decided January 12, 1972·No. 7110SC713·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

*433 VAUGHN, Judge.

Defendant’s assignments of error directed to the admission into evidence of the money order receipts are overruled. We hold that, under the circumstances of this case, the admission of the receipts did not constitute prejudicial error.

Defendant’s next assignment of error, that the court failed to grant his motion for nonsuit, is overruled. Although the defendant was not present in his residence at the time the drugs were seized, the State’s evidence was plenary to show that defendant possessed the drugs within the meaning of the statute. See State v. Allen, 279 N.C. 406, 183 S.E. 2d 680, and authorities cited. See also Ritter v. Commonwealth, 210 Va. 732, 173 S.E. 2d 799, a case where the facts, in many respects, are similar to those in the case at hand.

Defendant’s remaining assignments of error have been carefully considered and the same are overruled. Defendant received a fair trial free of prejudicial error.

No error.

Judges Brock and Britt concur.

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

State v. Kistler, 185 S.E.2d 596, 13 N.C. App. 431, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 2258 (N.C. Ct. App. 1972).

185 S.E.2d 596 (State v. Kistler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Reeves
209 N.W.2d 18 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1973)
State v. Godwin
187 S.E.2d 400 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1972)