Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

300 N.C. 744

268 S.E.2d 80

State v. Riddle

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided July 15, 1980

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1980-07-15

Relies on State v. Roseman

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1980-07-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently December 2017 · most notably State v. Young (1985), State v. Irwin (1981)

32 state decisions

1801980199020002010decided

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 →

PER CURIAM.

¶1 The sole assignment of error presented by both defendants on this appeal is whether or not there was sufficient evidence in the record to support the jury’s verdicts of guilty and the judgments and commitments entered thereon. In determining whether there is evidence sufficient for the judge to submit a case to the jury, “all admitted evidence favorable to the State, whether competent or incompetent, must be considered and must be deemed true. [Citations omitted.] The question for the Court is whether there is substantial evidence to support a finding both that an offense charged in the bill of indictment has been committed and that the defendant committed it [citations omitted].” State v. Roseman, 279 N.C. 573, 580, 184 S.E. 2d 289, 294 (1971).

¶2 After a thorough review of the record we are of the opinion there was sufficient, competent evidence of every essential element of the offenses charged, and sufficient, competent evidence for the jury to find that the defendants were the perpetrators of *747 these offenses. We conclude therefore that the verdicts are supported by the evidence and the judgments and commitments are supported by the verdicts.

¶3 In the defendants’ trial we find

¶4 No error.

/300/nc/744 · .json · Public domain