Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

1 N.C. App. 603

162 S.E.2d 97

State v. Evans

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · decided 1968-07-10

Relies on State v. Foster · State v. Parker

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1968-07-10

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently April 2009

8 state decisions

2019681970198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Campbell, J.

¶1 The defendant in this case submitted the complete transcript of the evidence under Rule 19(d)(2), but contrary to the provisions of that rule, the defendant did not attach an appendix to his brief setting forth in succinct language, with respect to those witnesses whose testimony he deemed to be pertinent to the questions raised on appeal, what he says the testimony of such witnesses would tend to establish. The defendant thereby imposed upon this Court the necessity of a voyage of discovery through the record. Ordinarily, this Court would dismiss such an appeal ex mero motu for failure to comply with the rules. Despite the failure to comply with the rules of this Court, we have reviewed the testimony and are of the opinion that the failure of the State’s evidence to identify the merchandise sold to Demps as being the same merchandise taken from Gales Tavern places this case within the doctrine of State v. Parker, 268 N.C. 258, 150 S.E. 2d 428, and State v. Foster, 268 N.C. 480, 151 S.E. 2d 62. The motion for judgment as of nonsuit should have been allowed.

¶2 Reversed.

Britt and Morris, JJ., concur.
/1/ncapp/603 · .json · Public domain