State v. Smith

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. Smith

435 S.E.2d 770, 335 N.C. 162, 1993 N.C. LEXIS 538

Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided November 5, 1993·No. 213A93·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

At trial defendant was convicted of first-degree kidnapping (91 CRS 2720), larceny of a firearm (91 CRS 2722), first-degree sex offense (91 CRS 3100) and robbery with a firearm (91 CRS 3332). A majority of the Court of Appeals, Judge Cozort dissenting, found error in the trial court’s failure to instruct on the lesser included offense of assault with a deadly weapon in the robbery case and remanded this case for a new trial. The Court of Appeals unanimously found no error in the other convictions.

The State appeals to us on the basis of Judge Cozort’s dissent, contending that the Court of Appeals’ decision in the robbery case was erroneous. We conclude the decision should be affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM.

At trial defendant was convicted of first-degree kidnapping (91 CRS 2720), larceny of a firearm (91 CRS 2722), first-degree sex offense (91 CRS 3100) and robbery with a firearm (91 CRS 3332). A majority of the Court of Appeals, Judge Cozort dissenting, found error in the trial court’s failure to instruct on the lesser included offense of assault with a deadly weapon in the robbery case and remanded this case for a new trial. The Court of Appeals unanimously found no error in the other convictions.

The State appeals to us on the basis of Judge Cozort’s dissent, contending that the Court of Appeals’ decision in the robbery case was erroneous. We conclude the decision should be affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

State v. Smith, 435 S.E.2d 770, 335 N.C. 162, 1993 N.C. LEXIS 538 (N.C. 1993).

Pincite

435 S.E.2d 770 (State v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related