State v. . Royal

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. . Royal

90 N.C. 755

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedFebruary 5, 1884

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 90 N.C. 755 (State v. . Royal) 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. . Royal, 90 N.C. 755 (N.C. 1884).

Pincite

Opinion

Ashe, J.

There is no principle of law better settled in this ■state than that evidence impeaching their verdict must not come from the jury, but must be shown by other testimony. State v. McLeod, 1 Hawks, 344; State v. Smallwood, 78 N. C., 560; State v. Brittain, 89 N. C., 481.

It is therefore ordered that the motion for a new trial be ■overruled, and that the superior court of Cumberland county proceed to judgment against the defendant agreeably to this •opinion according to law.

No Error.

Affirmed.

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

Ashe, J.

There is no principle of law better settled in this ■state than that evidence impeaching their verdict must not come from the jury, but must be shown by other testimony. State v. McLeod, 1 Hawks, 344; State v. Smallwood, 78 N. C., 560; State v. Brittain, 89 N. C., 481.

It is therefore ordered that the motion for a new trial be ■overruled, and that the superior court of Cumberland county proceed to judgment against the defendant agreeably to this •opinion according to law.

No Error.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

90 N.C. 755, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-royal-nc-1884.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack