Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1954

State v. Ayscue

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Decided April 28, 1954 · Per Curiam

81 S.E.2d 403; 240 N.C. 196; 1954 N.C. LEXIS 671 (South Eastern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

13 later published cases cite this decision.

State v. Jones (N.C. 1982)
State v. Hudson (N.C. 1972)
State v. Wallace (N.C. Ct. App. 1972)
State v. Benfield (N.C. Ct. App. 1970)
State v. Crabb (N.C. Ct. App. 1970)
State v. Cooper (N.C. Ct. App. 1969)
State v. Hitchcock (N.C. Ct. App. 1969)
State v. Moore (N.C. Ct. App. 1969)
State v. Williams (N.C. Ct. App. 1968)
State v. Beam (N.C. 1961)
State v. Womack (N.C. 1959)
State v. Barham (N.C. 1959)
State v. Hudler (N.C. 1965)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

Pee Cueiam.

The defendant, being without counsel in the trial below, seeks to challenge in this Court for the first time (1) the admissibility of portions of the evidence adduced against him, and (2) the sufficiency of the evidence to carry the case to the jury. However, the record discloses no objection to any of the evidence nor motion for judgment as of nonsuit. In fact, nowhere in the record is there an objection or exception to any ruling of the trial court. The objections, first made in this Court, come too late. Decision here is controlled by what is said in S. v. Howell, 239 N.C. 78, 79 S.E. 2d 235, and S. v. Gaston, 236 N.C. 499, 73 S.E. 2d 311.

True, the appeal itself is an exception to the judgment, S. v. Sloan, 238 N.C. 672, 78 S.E. 2d 738, but the judgment appears to be regular in form and is supported by the verdict. It would seem the defendant has applied to the wrong forum.

No error.

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