State v. Moore, 242PA86
| Decision Date | 07 April 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 242PA86,242PA86 |
| Citation | 354 S.E.2d 228,319 N.C. 393 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE of North Carolina v. Melvin Cecil MOORE and Billy Dean Transeau. |
Lacy H. Thornburg, Atty. Gen. by John H. Watters, Asst. Atty. Gen., Raleigh, for the State.
Dennis R. Joyce, Wilkesboro, for defendant-appellant Melvin Cecil Moore.
Vannoy, Moore, Colvard, Triplett & Freeman by Paul W. Freeman, Jr., for defendant-appellant Billy Dean Transeau.
Having carefully considered the opinion of the Court of Appeals, the records, briefs, and oral arguments in the case before us, we conclude that our orders of 6 May 1986 and 12 August 1986 allowing defendants' petitions for discretionary review were improvidently allowed.
The writ of supersedeas allowed to defendant Transeau on 6 May 1986 is hereby dissolved.
DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IMPROVIDENTLY ALLOWED.
WEBB, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hagler v. Hagler
...... Thus, in the absence of an equitable distribution under N.C.G.S. § 50-20, the state of the title of property owned by either spouse or by both spouses is unaffected. Nothing in the ... Moore v. Crumpton, 306 N.C. 618, 295 S.E.2d 436 (1982). Therefore, plaintiff had the burden to prove ......
-
State v. Leonard
...v. Horner, 310 N.C. 274, 311 S.E.2d 281 (1984), State v. Moore, 79 N.C.App. 666, 340 S.E.2d 771 (1986), disc. rev. denied, 319 N.C. 393, 354 S.E.2d 228 (1987). Moreover, in our opinion, a trained law enforcement officer need not swear to his ability to recognize an illegal substance in orde......
- State v. Connard