State v. White

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. White

161 S.E.2d 148, 273 N.C. 736, 1968 N.C. LEXIS 655

DecidedMay 22, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 161 S.E.2d 148 (State v. White) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. White, 161 S.E.2d 148, 273 N.C. 736, 1968 N.C. LEXIS 655 (N.C. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Cueiam.

It will be difficult indeed tó find in our books a case in which more compelling evidence of guilt was presented by the State. By independent evidence, the victim’s story was amply corroborated in all essential details and contradicted in none. The defense counsel, as was his duty, questioned the sufficiency of the evidence to convict. Likewise, he questions the accuracy of the Court’s charge. In neither particular was he successful in making the challenge good. The evidence was overwhelming and the Court’s charge fully sustained by our decisions. In addition to the points raised by defense counsel, we have examined the record with that care which is customary in capital cases and find the trial free from error. In recommending life imprisonment, the jury did not deal harshly with the defendant.

No error.

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

Pee Cueiam.

It will be difficult indeed tó find in our books a case in which more compelling evidence of guilt was presented by the State. By independent evidence, the victim’s story was amply corroborated in all essential details and contradicted in none. The defense counsel, as was his duty, questioned the sufficiency of the evidence to convict. Likewise, he questions the accuracy of the Court’s charge. In neither particular was he successful in making the challenge good. The evidence was overwhelming and the Court’s charge fully sustained by our decisions. In addition to the points raised by defense counsel, we have examined the record with that care which is customary in capital cases and find the trial free from error. In recommending life imprisonment, the jury did not deal harshly with the defendant.

No error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

161 S.E.2d 148, 273 N.C. 736, 1968 N.C. LEXIS 655, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-white-nc-1968.