State v. Russell

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Russell

211 S.E.2d 512, 24 N.C. App. 585, 1975 N.C. App. LEXIS 2443

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedFebruary 5, 1975

DocketNo. 7418SC906

StatusPublished

This text of 211 S.E.2d 512 (State v. Russell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals 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. Russell, 211 S.E.2d 512, 24 N.C. App. 585, 1975 N.C. App. LEXIS 2443 (N.C. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

BRITT, Judge.

Although defendants have assigned no error, the appeal of each defendant constitutes an exception to the judgment imposed on him and presents the case for review for error appearing on the face of the record. State v. Elliott, 269 N.C. 683, 153 S.E. 2d 330 (1967). We have reviewed the record proper and find [586]*586it to be free from prejudicial error. The verdicts and judgments will not be disturbed.

No error.

Chief Judge Brock and Judge Clark concur.

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

BRITT, Judge.

Although defendants have assigned no error, the appeal of each defendant constitutes an exception to the judgment imposed on him and presents the case for review for error appearing on the face of the record. State v. Elliott, 269 N.C. 683, 153 S.E. 2d 330 (1967). We have reviewed the record proper and find [586]*586it to be free from prejudicial error. The verdicts and judgments will not be disturbed.

No error.

Chief Judge Brock and Judge Clark concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

211 S.E.2d 512, 24 N.C. App. 585, 1975 N.C. App. LEXIS 2443, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-russell-ncctapp-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack