green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
65.0 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 2011 ·
…motion to dismiss should be allowed where the facts and circumstances warranted by the evidence do no more than raise a suspicion of guilt or conjecture since there would still remain a reasonable doubt as to defendant's guilt.
at p. 433
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1988 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1988
2007
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
State v. Ballard
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
circumstantial evidence is sufficient if it provides a basis for a reasonable inference of guilt.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
State v. Slaughter
(2×)
motion to dismiss should be allowed where the facts and circumstances warranted by the evidence do no more than raise a suspicion of guilt or conjecture since there would still remain a reasonable doubt as to defendant's guilt.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
State v. Thomas
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Williams
“Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Huckabee
(3×)
To survive a motion to dismiss, “[t]he evidence need only give rise to a reasonable inference of guilt in order for it to be properly submitted to the jury . . . .” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988) (citations omitted). -5- STATE V.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Jenkins
State v. Barnes, 334 N.C. 67, 75 , 430 S.E.2d 914, 918-19 (1993) (quoting State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988)). 1.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. French
“Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Shelton
The evidence need only give rise to a reasonable inference of guilt in order for it to be properly submitted to the jury[.]’” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988) (citations omitted).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. McCrorey
What Defendant describes as an assumption, however, can more appropriately be called circumstantial evidence— evidence which “may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction when [it] does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Burnett
State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988) (citation omitted).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Rouse
As such: “Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Rouse
As such: “Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Dover
Thus, “[c]ircumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” Blagg, ¶ 11 (alteration in original) (emphasis omitted) (quoting State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Dover
Thus, “[c]ircumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” Blagg, ¶ 11 (alteration in original) (emphasis omitted) (quoting State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Beck
(2×)
In reviewing the trial court’s decision on appeal, the evidence must be viewed “in the light most favorable to the State, giving the State the benefit of all reasonable inferences.” State v. Barnes, 334 N.C. 67, 75 , 430 S.E.2d 914, 918 (1993) (citation omitted). ¶ 19 In order to be submitted to the jury for determination of defendant’s guilt, the evidence “need only give rise to a reasonable inference of guilt.” State v. Turnage, 362 N.C. 491, 494 , 666 S.E.2d 753, 755 (2008) (citing State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988)). ¶ 20 This is true regardless of…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Beck
(2×)
In reviewing the trial court’s decision on appeal, the evidence must be viewed “in the light most favorable to the State, giving the State the benefit of all reasonable inferences.” State v. Barnes, 334 N.C. 67, 75 , 430 S.E.2d 914, 918 (1993) (citation omitted). ¶ 19 In order to be submitted to the jury for determination of defendant’s guilt, the evidence “need only give rise to a reasonable inference of guilt.” State v. Turnage, 362 N.C. 491, 494 , 666 S.E.2d 753, 755 (2008) (citing State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988)). ¶ 20 This is true regardless of…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Gibson
“Circumstantial evidence may . . . support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988) (citation omitted).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Gibson
“Circumstantial evidence may . . . support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988) (citation omitted).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Mylett
“A motion to dismiss should be granted, however, ‘where the facts and circumstances warranted by the evidence do no more than raise a suspicion of guilt or conjecture since there would still remain a reasonable doubt as to defendant’s guilt.’ ” State v. Turnage, 362 N.C. 491, 494 , 666 S.E.2d 753, 755 (2008) (quoting State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988)); see also Sumpter, 318 N.C. at 108 , 347 S.E.2d at 399 (“Evidence is not substantial if it arouses only a suspicion about the fact to be proved, even if the suspicion is strong.” (citing State v. Malloy,…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Mylett
“A motion to dismiss should be granted, however, ‘where the facts and circumstances warranted by the evidence do no more than raise a suspicion of guilt or conjecture since there would still remain a reasonable doubt as to defendant’s guilt.’ ” State v. Turnage, 362 N.C. 491, 494 , 666 S.E.2d 753, 755 (2008) (quoting State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988)); see also Sumpter, 318 N.C. at 108 , 347 S.E.2d at 399 (“Evidence is not substantial if it arouses only a suspicion about the fact to be proved, even if the suspicion is strong.” (citing State v. Malloy,…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. McDaniel
“Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988) (citation omitted).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Rodriguez
RODRIGUEZ Opinion of the Court withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Rodriguez
RODRIGUEZ Opinion of the Court withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Winkler
According to well-established North Carolina law: Circumstantial evidence may be utilized to overcome a motion to dismiss “ ‘even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.’ ” [State v.] Thomas, 350 N.C. [315,] [343], 514 S.E.2d [486,] 503 (quoting State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988)) [, cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1006 , 120 S. Ct. 503 , 145 L.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Hinton
“Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Robinson
(2×)
Substantial evidence is “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 451 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988) (citation omitted).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Hutcheson
While Defendant presented a theory that Mr. Parker, in fact, fired the shots into Mr. Kilpatrick’s home and then committed suicide, the test for determining whether the charge should have been submitted to the jury is not whether Defendant offered a plausible alternative explanation, but rather whether a “reasonable inference of [Defendant’s] guilt may be drawn from the circumstances.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Facyson
“Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Miles
(3×)
“Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Huerta
App. 245, 251 , 399 S.E.2d 357, 361 (1991), citing State v. Lynch, 327 N.C. 210, 215 , 393 S.E.2d 811, 814 (1990), and quoting State v. Brown, 310 N.C. .563, 566, 313 S.E.2d 585, 587 (1984), and State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988)), aff’d, 363 N.C. 367 , 677 S.E.2d 455 (2009). 1.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Carver
(2×)
App. 234 , 240—41, 309 S.E.2d 464 , 468—69 (1983) (where the trial court erred by denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss when the State presented substantial opportunity evidence but no evidence of motive)); but c.f State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 453-54 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 434 (1988) (affirming the trial court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to dismiss because though the State presented no evidence of motive, it presented more circumstantial evidence of opportunity than was presented in Bell , including evidence that the defendant’s gun was the one used to kill the victim, that …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Clowers
Our Supreme Court has further noted that “[ c]ircumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. McDowell
The evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the State, must be sufficient to “give rise to a reasonable inference of guilt.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Teague
Our Supreme Court has further noted that “Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Griffin
Ed. 2d 122 (2005). “ ‘Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.’ ” State v. Taylor, 337 N.C. 597, 604 , 447 S.E.2d 360, 365 (1994) (quoting State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Hayden
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
Circumstantial evidence may be sufficient to overcome a motion to dismiss “even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. PASTUER
“Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. DISROE
It is well-settled that "[c]ourts may resort to circumstantial evidence of motive, opportunity, capability and identity to identify the accused as the perpetrator of the crime." State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 434 (1988) (citing State v. Pridgen, 313 N.C. 80 , 326 S.E.2d 618 (1985)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Sweat
"Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence." State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Liggons
“Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Hall
“Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Alston
(2×)
“Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Chappelle
The court must consider all “the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, giving the State the benefit of all *324 reasonable inferences.” Id. (citation omitted). “ ‘Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.’ ” Id., 430 S.E.2d at 919 (quoting State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Turnage
Moreover, “[circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988) (citing State v. Stephens, 244 N.C! 380, 384, 93 S.E.2d 431, 433 (1956).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Milligan
“Circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988) (citing State v. Stephens, 244 N.C. 380, 384 , 93 S.E.2d 431, 433 (1956)).
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
In Re SDR
(3×)
"Substantial evidence is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 451 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988) (quotations and citations omitted).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
In re S.D.R.
(2×)
Furthermore, "[c]ircumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence." Id. at 452 , 373 S.E.2d at 433 (citation omitted).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Chapman
Ed. 2d 216 (1998) (quoting State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Tirado
Moreover, “ [circumstantial evidence may withstand a motion to dismiss and support a conviction even when the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Pullen
Circumstantial evidence may be sufficient to support a conviction even when “ ‘the evidence does not rule out every hypothesis of innocence.’ ” State v. Haselden, 357 N.C. 1, 18 , 577 S.E.2d 594, 605 (quoting State v. Stone, 323 N.C. 447, 452 , 373 S.E.2d 430, 433 (1988)), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 988 , 157 L.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Debra Anne KARP
v.
UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA.
v.
UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA.
80PA88.
Supreme Court of North Carolina.
Nov 3, 1988.
Per Curiam.
Published
Coleman, Bernholz, Dickerson, Bernholz, Gledhill & Hargrave by G. Nicholas Herman, Chapel Hill, for plaintiff-appellee.
Lacy H. Thornburg, Atty. Gen. by Steve Nimocks, Sp. Deputy Att. Gen. and Victor H.E. Morgan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Raleigh, for defendant-appellant.
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED.