State v. . Thomas

38 S.E.2d 166, 226 N.C. 384, 1946 N.C. LEXIS 454
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided May 22, 1946·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The defendant’s only exception was to the charge of the court for failure to “charge the law and facts relative to this case.” As frankly admitted in defendant’s brief this is unpointed broadside. Rawls v. Lupton, 193 N. C., 428, 137 S. E., 175. The record shows the trial free from error. The Attorney-General moves in this Court that the judgment below be affirmed. The defendant does not resist the motion.

The motion is allowed, and the judgment

Affirmed.

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

State v. . Thomas, 38 S.E.2d 166, 226 N.C. 384, 1946 N.C. LEXIS 454 (N.C. 1946).

38 S.E.2d 166 (State v. . Thomas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Vanhoy
52 S.E.2d 278 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1949)
State v. Glatly
52 S.E.2d 277 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1949)