State v. Walston

368 N.C. 351, 2015 N.C. LEXIS 1027
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided September 24, 2015·No. No. 392PA13-2·Published

Opinion

ORDER

The defendant’s petition for discretionary review is allowed for the limited purpose of remanding this case to the Court of Appeals to (1) determine, in light of our holding and analysis in State v. King, 366 N.C. 68, _ S.E. 2d _(2012) (applying North Carolina Rules of Evidence 403 and 702), and other relevant authority, if the trial court’s decision to exclude the expert testimony was an abuse of discretion and, if so, (2) determine if the erroneous decision to exclude the testimony prejudiced defendant. The petition is denied as to any remaining issues.

By Order of this Court, this 24th day of September, 2015.

s/Ervin. J.

For the Court

WITNESS my hand and the seal of the Supreme Court of North Carolina, this the 25th day of September, 2015.

CHRISTIE S. CAMERON ROEDER Clerk of the Supreme Court

s/M.C. Hacknev Assistant Clerk

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

State v. Walston, 368 N.C. 351, 2015 N.C. LEXIS 1027 (N.C. 2015).

368 N.C. 351 (State v. Walston) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. King
733 S.E.2d 535 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 2012)