State v. Crowder

STATE of North Carolina v. Albert CROWDER, Jr.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 27, 1978.

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1978-04-27

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“Inasmuch as defendant did not assign as error on appeal the failure of the trial judge to place the burden of proving the absence of heat of passion or the absence of self-defense on the state, . . . (citation omitted) he has waived his right now to complain about such errors. Hankerson v. North Carolina, 432 U.S. 233 , 244, n. 8, 97 S.Ct. 2339, 2345, 53 L.Ed.2d 306 (1977).”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Cole v. Stevenson

Relies on Hankerson v. North Carolina · State v. Crowder

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1978-04-27

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently May 2014

21 state decisions

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 →

¶1Gerald L. Bass, Raleigh, David E. Kendall, NAACP Defense Atty., New York City, for defendant.

¶2T. Buie Costen, Asst. Atty. Gen., Burley B. Mitchell, Jr., Dist. Atty., for the State.

¶3

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

¶4EXUM, Justice.

¶5Inasmuch as defendant did not assign as error on appeal the failure of the trial judge to place the burden of proving the absence of heat of passion or the absence of self-defense on the state, see State v. Crowder,285 N.C. 42, 203 S.E.2d 38 (1974), he has waived his right now to complain about such errors. Hankerson v. North Carolina,432 U.S. 233, 244, n.8, 97 S.Ct. 2339, 2345, n.8, 53 L.Ed.2d 306, 316, n.8 (1977). Now, therefore, it is

¶6ORDERED by the Court in Conference that defendant's motion for reconsideration be and it is hereby denied.

¶7This the 12th day of September, 1977.