State v. St. John
194 S.E.2d 872, 17 N.C. App. 587, 1973 N.C. App. LEXIS 1416
Court of Appeals of North Carolina·Decided March 14, 1973·No. No. 7315SC90·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
The record contains no exceptions or assignments of error. The following appears in the record as appellant’s statement of case on appeal.
“I have made a study of this record, and I am unable to find any error save the very severe procedure which allows the State to introduce evidence of the defendant’s prior conviction and to permit the Solicitor to read to the jury the warrant which alleged the prior convictions.”
The procedure complained of was approved and held to be without error in the case of State v. Owenby, 10 N.C. App. 170, 177 S.E. 2d 749 (1970).
We have carefully examined the record and find no error on the face thereof. The defendant had a fair trial free from prejudicial error.
No error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. St. John, 194 S.E.2d 872, 17 N.C. App. 587, 1973 N.C. App. LEXIS 1416 (N.C. Ct. App. 1973).
194 S.E.2d 872 (State v. St. John) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. Jeffers
269 S.E.2d 731 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1980)