Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940

State v. . Rodgers

State v. . Rodgers
Supreme Court of North Carolina · Decided May 22, 1940 · PER CURIAM.
8 S.E.2d 927; 217 N.C. 622; 1940 N.C. LEXIS 307 (South Eastern Reporter, Second Series)

State v. . Rodgers

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The motion of the Attorney-General to dismiss the appeal for the reason that no appeal lies to this Court from a discretionary determination of an application for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence must be allowed on authority of S. v. Ferrell, 206 N. C., 738, 175 S. E., 91, and Jarrett v. Ins. Co., 208 N. C., 343.

The case is not like Crane v. Carswell, 204 N. C., 571, 169 S. E., 160, where the “newly discovered evidence,” as this phrase is defined in the law, was insufficient to invoke a discretionary ruling in favor of the movant.

Appeal dismissed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.