burden of showing error in North Carolina

2006See State v. Locklear, 349 N.C. 118, 149 , 505 S.E.2d 277, 295 (1998) (the appellant "has the burden of showing error and that there was a reasonable possibility that a different result would have been reached at trial if such error had not occurred"), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1075 , 119 S.Ct. 1475 , 143 L.Ed.2d 559 (1999).

2006See State v. Locklear, 349 N.C. 118, 149 , 505 S.E.2d 277, 295 (1998) (the appellant "has the burden of showing error and that there was a reasonable possibility that a different result would have been reached at trial if such error had not occurred"), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1075 , 119 S.Ct. 1475 , 143 L.Ed.2d 559 (1999).

2006See State v. Locklear, 349 N.C. 118, 149 , 505 S.E.2d 277, 295 (1998) (the appellant "has the burden of showing error and that there was a reasonable possibility that a different result would have been reached at trial if such error had not occurred"), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1075 , 119 S.Ct. 1475 , 143 L.Ed.2d 559 (1999).

2006"Defendant has the burden of showing error and that there was a reasonable possibility that a different result would have been reached at trial if such error had not occurred." State v. Locklear, 349 N.C. 118, 149 , 505 S.E.2d 277, 295 (1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1075 , 119 S.Ct. 1475 , 143 L.Ed.2d 559 (1999); N.C.

2006See State v. Locklear, 349 N.C. 118, 149 , 505 S.E.2d 277, 295 (1998) (the appellant "has the burden of showing error and that there was a reasonable possibility that a different result would have been reached at trial if such error had not occurred"), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1075 , 119 S.Ct. 1475 , 143 L.Ed.2d 559 (1999).

2006"Defendant has the burden of showing error and that there was a reasonable possibility that a different result would have been reached at trial if such error had not occurred." State v. Locklear, 349 N.C. 118, 149 , 505 S.E.2d 277, 295 (1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1075 , 119 S.Ct. 1475 , 143 L.Ed.2d 559 (1999); N.C.

2003"The party challenging the ordinance has the burden of showing error." Knight v. Wilmington, 73 N.C.App. 254, 255 , 326 S.E.2d 376, 377 (1985) "On appeal, the findings of fact made below are binding on this Court if supported by the evidence, even when there may be evidence to the contrary." Humphries v. Jacksonville, 300 N.C. 186, 187 , 265 S.E.2d 189, 190 (1980).

2003"The party challenging the ordinance has the burden of showing error." Knight v. Wilmington, 73 N.C.App. 254, 255 , 326 S.E.2d 376, 377 (1985) "On appeal, the findings of fact made below are binding on this Court if supported by the evidence, even when there may be evidence to the contrary." Humphries v. Jacksonville, 300 N.C. 186, 187 , 265 S.E.2d 189, 190 (1980).

2006Gen.Stat. § 15A-1443(a) (2005); see also State v. Sills, 311 N.C. 370, 378 , 317 S.E.2d 379, 384 (1984) ("[T]he defendant has the burden of showing that he was prejudiced by the [erroneous admission of hearsay] and that there was a reasonable possibility that a different result would have been reached at trial if the error had not been committed.").

2006Gen.Stat. § 15A-1443(a) (2005); see also State v. Sills, 311 N.C. 370, 378 , 317 S.E.2d 379, 384 (1984) ("[T]he defendant has the burden of showing that he was prejudiced by the [erroneous admission of hearsay] and that there was a reasonable possibility that a different result would have been reached at trial if the error had not been committed.").

1994See Gum, 107 N.C.

1994App. 734, 738 , 421 S.E.2d 788, 791 (1992) (appellant has the burden of showing error).

2011App. 247, 256 , 337 S.E.2d 607, 613 (1985) (citing Gregory v. Lynch, 271 N.C. 198, 203 , 155 S.E.2d 488, 492 (1967) (stating that the burden of showing error falls to the party asserting the same)), disc. review denied, 316 N.C. 195 , 341 S.E.2d 585 , revVI in part on other grounds, 318 N.C. 404 , 348 S.E.2d 593 (1986), appeal after remand, 88 N.C.

1994Patton v. Patton, 78 N.C.

1978In In re Annexation Ordinance, 284 N.C. 442, 452 , 202 S.E. 2d 143 (1974), this court, speaking through Huskins, J., said: “As a general rule it is presumed that a public official in the performance of his official duties ‘acts fairly, impartially, and in good faith and in the exercise of sound judgment or discretion, for the purpose of promoting the public good and protecting the public interest. [Citation omitted.] The presumption of regularity of official acts is rebuttable by affirmative evidence of irregularity or failure to perform duty, but the burden of producing such evidence rests on

1978In In re Annexation Ordinance, 284 N.C. 442, 452 , 202 S.E. 2d 143 (1974), this court, speaking through Huskins, J., said: “As a general rule it is presumed that a public official in the performance of his official duties ‘acts fairly, impartially, and in good faith and in the exercise of sound judgment or discretion, for the purpose of promoting the public good and protecting the public interest. [Citation omitted.] The presumption of regularity of official acts is rebuttable by affirmative evidence of irregularity or failure to perform duty, but the burden of producing such evidence rests on

2019London v. London, 271 N.C. 568, 570-71 , 157 S.E.2d 90, 92 (1967).

2019London v. London, 271 N.C. 568, 570-71 , 157 S.E.2d 90, 92 (1967).

2011App. 247, 256 , 337 S.E.2d 607, 613 (1985) (citing Gregory v. Lynch, 271 N.C. 198, 203 , 155 S.E.2d 488, 492 (1967) (stating that the burden of showing error falls to the party asserting the same)), disc. review denied, 316 N.C. 195 , 341 S.E.2d 585 , revVI in part on other grounds, 318 N.C. 404 , 348 S.E.2d 593 (1986), appeal after remand, 88 N.C.

2011App. 247, 256 , 337 S.E.2d 607, 613 (1985) (citing Gregory v. Lynch, 271 N.C. 198, 203 , 155 S.E.2d 488, 492 (1967) (stating that the burden of showing error falls to the party asserting the same)), disc. review denied, 316 N.C. 195 , 341 S.E.2d 585 , revVI in part on other grounds, 318 N.C. 404 , 348 S.E.2d 593 (1986), appeal after remand, 88 N.C.

2003"The party challenging the ordinance has the burden of showing error." Knight v. Wilmington, 73 N.C.App. 254, 255 , 326 S.E.2d 376, 377 (1985) "On appeal, the findings of fact made below are binding on this Court if supported by the evidence, even when there may be evidence to the contrary." Humphries v. Jacksonville, 300 N.C. 186, 187 , 265 S.E.2d 189, 190 (1980).

2003"The party challenging the ordinance has the burden of showing error." Knight v. Wilmington, 73 N.C.App. 254, 255 , 326 S.E.2d 376, 377 (1985) "On appeal, the findings of fact made below are binding on this Court if supported by the evidence, even when there may be evidence to the contrary." Humphries v. Jacksonville, 300 N.C. 186, 187 , 265 S.E.2d 189, 190 (1980).

1995See State v. Walters, 294 N.C. 311, 314 , 240 S.E.2d 628, 630 (1978) (holding that the burden of showing error under N.C.G.S. § 84-14 is on defendant); see also State v. Gardner, 316 N.C. 605, 613 , 342 S.E.2d 872, 877 (1986) (analyzing an error under N.C.G.S. § 84-14, pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 15A-1443(a)). *216 N.C.G.S. § 15-176.5 provides the State or the defendant with the right “to inform the jury of the consequences of a verdict of guilty [in a capital case].” State v. McMorris, 290 N.C. at 289 , 225 S.E.2d at 555 .

1995See State v. Walters, 294 N.C. 311, 314 , 240 S.E.2d 628, 630 (1978) (holding that the burden of showing error under N.C.G.S. § 84-14 is on defendant); see also State v. Gardner, 316 N.C. 605, 613 , 342 S.E.2d 872, 877 (1986) (analyzing an error under N.C.G.S. § 84-14, pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 15A-1443(a)). *216 N.C.G.S. § 15-176.5 provides the State or the defendant with the right “to inform the jury of the consequences of a verdict of guilty [in a capital case].” State v. McMorris, 290 N.C. at 289 , 225 S.E.2d at 555 .

1995See State v. Walters, 294 N.C. 311, 314 , 240 S.E.2d 628, 630 (1978) (holding that the burden of showing error under N.C.G.S. § 84-14 is on defendant); see also State v. Gardner, 316 N.C. 605, 613 , 342 S.E.2d 872, 877 (1986) (analyzing an error under N.C.G.S. § 84-14, pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 15A-1443(a)). *216 N.C.G.S. § 15-176.5 provides the State or the defendant with the right “to inform the jury of the consequences of a verdict of guilty [in a capital case].” State v. McMorris, 290 N.C. at 289 , 225 S.E.2d at 555 .

1995See State v. Walters, 294 N.C. 311, 314 , 240 S.E.2d 628, 630 (1978) (holding that the burden of showing error under N.C.G.S. § 84-14 is on defendant); see also State v. Gardner, 316 N.C. 605, 613 , 342 S.E.2d 872, 877 (1986) (analyzing an error under N.C.G.S. § 84-14, pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 15A-1443(a)). *216 N.C.G.S. § 15-176.5 provides the State or the defendant with the right “to inform the jury of the consequences of a verdict of guilty [in a capital case].” State v. McMorris, 290 N.C. at 289 , 225 S.E.2d at 555 .

1995See State v. Walters, 294 N.C. 311, 314 , 240 S.E.2d 628, 630 (1978) (holding that the burden of showing error under N.C.G.S. § 84-14 is on defendant); see also State v. Gardner, 316 N.C. 605, 613 , 342 S.E.2d 872, 877 (1986) (analyzing an error under N.C.G.S. § 84-14, pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 15A-1443(a)). *216 N.C.G.S. § 15-176.5 provides the State or the defendant with the right “to inform the jury of the consequences of a verdict of guilty [in a capital case].” State v. McMorris, 290 N.C. at 289 , 225 S.E.2d at 555 .

1995See State v. Walters, 294 N.C. 311, 314 , 240 S.E.2d 628, 630 (1978) (holding that the burden of showing error under N.C.G.S. § 84-14 is on defendant); see also State v. Gardner, 316 N.C. 605, 613 , 342 S.E.2d 872, 877 (1986) (analyzing an error under N.C.G.S. § 84-14, pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 15A-1443(a)). *216 N.C.G.S. § 15-176.5 provides the State or the defendant with the right “to inform the jury of the consequences of a verdict of guilty [in a capital case].” State v. McMorris, 290 N.C. at 289 , 225 S.E.2d at 555 .