State v. Thompson

208 S.E.2d 878, 23 N.C. App. 339, 1974 N.C. App. LEXIS 2088
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Thompson. Read the opinion of the Court — 27 N.C. App. 576
Court of Appeals of North Carolina·Decided October 16, 1974·No. No. 7410SC735·Published

Opinion

HEDRICK, Judge.

Defendant contends the court erred in denying his timely motions for judgment as of nonsuit. Suffice it to say, there is plenary competent evidence in the record to require submission of this case to the jury and to support the verdicts.

All of the other exceptions brought forward and argued in defendant’s brief relate to the court’s instructions to the jury. We have carefully examined the entire charge in the light of all the defendant’s exceptions and conclude that the charge given by the able judge was fair, adequate, and correct. Any elaboration on these contentions would serve no useful purpose. The defendant had a fair trial free from prejudicial error.

No error.

Judges Morris and Baley concur.

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

State v. Thompson, 208 S.E.2d 878, 23 N.C. App. 339, 1974 N.C. App. LEXIS 2088 (N.C. Ct. App. 1974).

208 S.E.2d 878 (State v. Thompson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.