State v. Love
This text of 153 S.E.2d 381 (State v. Love) 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.
Opinion
The appellant’s first assignment of error challenges the Court’s refusal to sequester the witnesses upon the appellant’s motion. The refusal was in the Court’s discretion and not reviewable. State v. Spencer, 239 N.C. 604, 80 S.E. 2d 670. Another assignment involved the admissibility of evidence. Any error in this respect was cured by the failure to place in the record the excluded evidence so the Court could determine its materiality. In one instance evidence of the same import was admitted without objection.
The record does not disclose any reason why the verdict and judgment should be disturbed.
No error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
153 S.E.2d 381, 269 N.C. 691, 1967 N.C. LEXIS 1134, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-love-nc-1967.