State v. . McLamb

125 S.E. 530, 188 N.C. 803, 1924 N.C. LEXIS 178
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided December 19, 1924·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Pee Curiam.

All the exceptions are based, directly or indirectly, on the .single proposition that the warrant as amended is not sufficient to sustain the verdict. The exceptions cannot be sustained. The amended warrant charges the defendant not only with an assault with a deadly *804 weapon, but with, an assault, whereby serious damage was done, and sets forth with sufficient particularity the nature and extent of the serious damage or injury alleged to have been inflicted. C. S., 1481, 4215; S. v. Huntley, 91 N. C., 617; S. v. Cunningham, 94 N. C., 824; S. v. Shelley, 98 N. C., 673.

We find

No error.

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

State v. . McLamb, 125 S.E. 530, 188 N.C. 803, 1924 N.C. LEXIS 178 (N.C. 1924).

125 S.E. 530 (State v. . McLamb) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. . Goff
172 S.E. 407 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1934)
State v. . Myrick
163 S.E. 803 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1932)