State v. Mason

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. Mason

444 S.E.2d 169, 336 N.C. 595, 1994 N.C. LEXIS 289

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedJune 17, 1994

Docket446A93

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 444 S.E.2d 169 (State v. Mason) 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. Mason, 444 S.E.2d 169, 336 N.C. 595, 1994 N.C. LEXIS 289 (N.C. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

*597 WEBB, Justice.

The defendant’s only assignment of error is to the overruling of his motion to dismiss for the insufficiency of the evidence. He bases this argument on certain inconsistencies in the evidence and particularly on some evidence that the pistol may have fired accidentally. In determining whether evidence is sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss, the evidence is considered in the light most favorable to the State. If there is a conflict in the evidence, the resolution of the conflict is for the jury. State v. Mitchum, 258 N.C. 337, 128 S.E.2d 665 (1962). In the light most favorable to the State, there was sufficient evidence in this case to support a conviction of first degree murder. This assignment of error is overruled.

The defendant next asks us to review the record pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493, reh’g denied, 388 U.S. 924, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1377 (1967), to determine whether any error occurred which would require a new trial. We said in State v. Barton, 335 N.C. 696, 441 S.E.2d 295 (1994), that generally an appellant’s attorney should ask this Court to search the record for errors pursuant to Anders only if he believes the whole appeal is without merit. That is not the case in this appeal because the defendant has assigned error. We have examined the record nevertheless and we find no error.

NO ERROR.

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

*597 WEBB, Justice.

The defendant’s only assignment of error is to the overruling of his motion to dismiss for the insufficiency of the evidence. He bases this argument on certain inconsistencies in the evidence and particularly on some evidence that the pistol may have fired accidentally. In determining whether evidence is sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss, the evidence is considered in the light most favorable to the State. If there is a conflict in the evidence, the resolution of the conflict is for the jury. State v. Mitchum, 258 N.C. 337, 128 S.E.2d 665 (1962). In the light most favorable to the State, there was sufficient evidence in this case to support a conviction of first degree murder. This assignment of error is overruled.

The defendant next asks us to review the record pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493, reh’g denied, 388 U.S. 924, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1377 (1967), to determine whether any error occurred which would require a new trial. We said in State v. Barton, 335 N.C. 696, 441 S.E.2d 295 (1994), that generally an appellant’s attorney should ask this Court to search the record for errors pursuant to Anders only if he believes the whole appeal is without merit. That is not the case in this appeal because the defendant has assigned error. We have examined the record nevertheless and we find no error.

NO ERROR.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

444 S.E.2d 169, 336 N.C. 595, 1994 N.C. LEXIS 289, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-mason-nc-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack