Home/Supreme Court of North Carolina/State v. Seipel

State v. Seipel

113 S.E.2d 432, 252 N.C. 335, 1960 N.C. LEXIS 551
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedApril 6, 1960
Docket364
StatusPublished
Cited by25 cases

This text of 113 S.E.2d 432 (State v. Seipel) 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. Seipel, 113 S.E.2d 432, 252 N.C. 335, 1960 N.C. LEXIS 551 (N.C. 1960).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Careful consideration of matters to which assignments of error relate fails to reveal prejudicial error for which the judgment below should be disturbed. The evidence shown in the record of case on appeal makes a case for the jury sufficient to support the verdict of the jury, upon which the judgment below is predicated.

Indeed the principal error assigned relates to remarks made by the Solicitor in his argument to the jury to which defendant objected. In respect thereto the record discloses that the remarks of the Solicitor were apparently invited by remarks of the attorney for defendant in addressing the jury. As to such matter, the control of arguments of Solicitor and of counsel to the jury must be left largely to the discretion of the trial court. Such is the case here. A new trial is not justified.

No error.

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

Related

Roberts v. Young
464 S.E.2d 78 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1995)
State v. Potter
316 S.E.2d 359 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1984)
State v. King
264 S.E.2d 40 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1980)
State v. Rupard
263 S.E.2d 554 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1980)
State v. Barfield
259 S.E.2d 510 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1979)
State v. Barbour
258 S.E.2d 72 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1979)
State v. Sports
255 S.E.2d 631 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1979)
State v. Brown
251 S.E.2d 706 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1979)
State v. Moore
237 S.E.2d 339 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1977)
State v. McKenna
224 S.E.2d 537 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1976)
State v. McCall
223 S.E.2d 303 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1976)
State v. Miller
220 S.E.2d 326 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1975)
State v. Britt
220 S.E.2d 283 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1975)
State v. Wortham
215 S.E.2d 131 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1975)
State v. Stegmann
213 S.E.2d 262 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1975)
State v. Monk
212 S.E.2d 125 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1975)
State v. Young
204 S.E.2d 556 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1974)
State v. Curtis
196 S.E.2d 278 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1973)
State v. Parks
187 S.E.2d 462 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1972)
State v. Westbrook
181 S.E.2d 572 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1971)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
113 S.E.2d 432, 252 N.C. 335, 1960 N.C. LEXIS 551, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-seipel-nc-1960.