green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 4×
12.6 score
“believing that this court has already fully addressed all the issues it can properly address within the limits of its appellate jurisdiction, the petition of the state is denied without prejudice to the state's right to seek appellate review in the federal system....”
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Kermit Smith, Jr. v. Gary Dixon, Warden, Central Prison, Raleigh, North Carolina, Kermit Smith, Jr. v. Gary Dixon, Warden, Central Prison, Raleigh, North Carolina
believing that this court has already fully addressed all the issues it can properly address within the limits of its appellate jurisdiction, the petition of the state is denied without prejudice to the state's right to seek appellate review in the federal system....
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Smith v. Dixon
believing that this court has already fully addressed all the issues it can properly address within the limits of its appellate jurisdiction, the petition of the state is denied without prejudice to the state's right to seek appellate review in the federal sys-tem_
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Smith v. Dixon
believing that this court has already fully addressed all the issues it can properly address within the limits of its appellate jurisdiction, the petition of the state is denied_
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Kermit Smith, Jr. v. Gary Dixon, Warden, Central Prison, Raleigh, North Carolina, Kermit Smith, Jr. v. Gary Dixon, Warden, Central Prison, Raleigh, North Carolina
believing that this court has already fully addressed all the issues it can properly address within the limits of its appellate jurisdiction, the petition of the state is denied....
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
State v. Jackson
App. 448, 453 , 409 S.E.2d 719, 722 (1991), disc. review denied, 330 N.C. 617 , 412 S.E.2d 94 *289 (1992).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE
v.
STONE
v.
STONE
No. 524P91.
Supreme Court of North Carolina.
Jan 9, 1992.
Published
Citer courts: Fourth Circuit (4)
Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 9 January 1992.