Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1965

State v. Jackson

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Decided November 3, 1965 · Gueiam

144 S.E.2d 584; 265 N.C. 558; 1965 N.C. LEXIS 1044 (South Eastern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

11 later published cases cite this decision.

State v. Hudson (N.C. Ct. App. 1973)
State v. Neely (N.C. Ct. App. 1969)
State v. Brown (N.C. Ct. App. 1968)
State v. Revelle (N.C. 1980)
State v. Carson (N.C. 1978)
State v. Vick (N.C. 1975)
State v. Vick (N.C. 1975)
State v. Turner (N.C. Ct. App. 1974)
State v. Anderson (N.C. 1972)
State v. Shutt (N.C. 1971)
State v. Gattison (N.C. Ct. App. 1969)

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

PeR Gueiam.

On motion for judgment of nonsuit the evidence must be considered in the light most favorable to the State and contradictions and discrepancies therein do not warrant the granting of the motion. State v. Thompson, 256 N.C. 593, 124 S.E. 2d 728; State v. Roop, 255 N.C. 607, 122 S.E. 2d 363; State v. Simpson, 244 N.C. 325, 93 S.E. 2d 425. There was ample evidence to support a finding of each element of the offense with which the defendant was charged and of which the jury found him guilty. There was no error in overruling the motion for judgment of nonsuit.

The trial court had discretionary power to permit the introduction of additional evidence after both parties had rested and arguments had been made to the jury. State v. Harding, 263 N.C. 799, 140 S.E. 2d 244. The limitation of the scope of subsequent arguments to the jury was also in the discretion of the trial court.

We have carefully examined the exceptions to the various rulings of the court upon the admission of evidence and the exceptions to the charge to the jury. We find no merit in any of them.

No error.

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