State v. . McCall

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. . McCall

143 S.E. 927, 195 N.C. 877, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 250

DecidedMay 23, 1928

StatusPublished

This text of 143 S.E. 927 (State v. . McCall) 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. . McCall, 143 S.E. 927, 195 N.C. 877, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 250 (N.C. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant assigns as error the failure of the court in its charge to the jury to define the crime of larceny, as charged in the indictment, and also to state in a plain and correct manner the evidence given in the case, and to declare and explain the law arising thereon. C. S., 564. Upon a careful examination of the charge as contained in the case on appeal, served by defendant’s counsel, and accepted by the Solicitor for the State, we must sustain this assignment of error, on the authority of S. v. Eunice, 194 N. C., 409. Defendant is entitled to a

New trial.

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

Per Curiam.

Defendant assigns as error the failure of the court in its charge to the jury to define the crime of larceny, as charged in the indictment, and also to state in a plain and correct manner the evidence given in the case, and to declare and explain the law arising thereon. C. S., 564. Upon a careful examination of the charge as contained in the case on appeal, served by defendant’s counsel, and accepted by the Solicitor for the State, we must sustain this assignment of error, on the authority of S. v. Eunice, 194 N. C., 409. Defendant is entitled to a

New trial.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 S.E. 927, 195 N.C. 877, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 250, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-mccall-nc-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack