identity exception in North Carolina

9 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1982–2014 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by North Carolina courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (4)

Case	Followed	Cited
State v. Mooregreen nc · 1983 · cited in 3 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1987–1988 2 sentences 1988Defendant relies upon both State v. Thomas, 310 N.C. 369 , 312 S.E. 2d 458 (1984); and State v. Moore, 309 N.C. 102 , 305 S.E. 2d 542 (1983), in order to support her contention that “in order for evidence to be admissible under the identity exception the circumstances of the two crimes must be such as to tend to show that the crime charged and the other offense were committed by the same person.” In fact, this contention lends greater credence to our view that the challenged testimony is not the sort contemplated in N.C.R. 1988Defendant relies upon both State v. Thomas, 310 N.C. 369 , 312 S.E. 2d 458 (1984); and State v. Moore, 309 N.C. 102 , 305 S.E. 2d 542 (1983), in order to support her contention that “in order for evidence to be admissible under the identity exception the circumstances of the two crimes must be such as to tend to show that the crime charged and the other offense were committed by the same person.” In fact, this contention lends greater credence to our view that the challenged testimony is not the sort contemplated in N.C.R.	2	3
State v. Graingergreen ncctapp · 1982 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1987–1987 2 sentences 1987"Nondisclosure of an informant's identity is a privilege justified by the need for effective law enforcement...." State v. Grainger, 60 N.C.App. 188, 190 , 298 S.E.2d 203, 204 (1982), disc. rev. denied, 307 N.C. 579 , 299 S.E.2d 648 (1983). 1987"Nondisclosure of an informant's identity is a privilege justified by the need for effective law enforcement...." State v. Grainger, 60 N.C.App. 188, 190 , 298 S.E.2d 203, 204 (1982), disc. rev. denied, 307 N.C. 579 , 299 S.E.2d 648 (1983).	1	2
Bockweg v. Andersongreen nc · 1993 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014 2 sentences 2014Therefore, the court will engage in the full identity analysis as traditionally required under the doctrine. [31] As a preliminary matter, the court notes that res judicata and collateral estoppel are "companion doctrines," Bockweg v. Anderson, 333 N.C. 486, 491 (1993), that traditionally have shared the identity requirement. 2014Therefore, the court will engage in the full identity analysis as traditionally required under the doctrine. [31] As a preliminary matter, the court notes that res judicata and collateral estoppel are "companion doctrines," Bockweg v. Anderson, 333 N.C. 486, 491 (1993), that traditionally have shared the identity requirement.	1	1
State v. Riddickgreen nc · 1986 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1987–1987 2 sentences 1987State v. Riddick, 316 N.C. 127, 133 , 340 S.E.2d 422, 426 (1986); State v. Moore, 309 N.C. 102, 106 , 305 S.E.2d 542, 545 (1983). 1987State v. Riddick, 316 N.C. 127, 133 , 340 S.E.2d 422, 426 (1986); State v. Moore, 309 N.C. 102, 106 , 305 S.E.2d 542, 545 (1983).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (13)

Case	Cited	Years
TROY LUMBER COMPANY v. Hunt green nc · 1960 1 sentence 2014App 147 (2001), for the proposition that control of prior litigation "[does] not establish privity in and of itself."56 This is uncontested – as outlined above, Plaintiffs satisfy the identity requirement because they controlled the prior action and had a proprietary interest in that action as well as an interest in the determination of issues at stake in that action. [46] Plaintiffs incorrectly characterize the Lassiter rule as mere "dicta from Cline" and attempt to distinguish Lassiter and Cline on the grounds that the former involved a father-son relationship and the latter a principal-agen	1	2014–2014
State v. Streath green ncctapp · 1985 2 sentences 1989To support the proposition that evidence of other crimes is permissible only as rebuttal evidence, he emphasizes the following statement by this court in Streath : "[U]nless the defendant presents alibi evidence, evidence of other crimes to show identity, either directly or indirectly (common plan), should not be admitted under McClain." State v. Streath, 73 N.C.App. 546, 550 , 327 S.E.2d 240, 242 , disc. rev. denied, 313 N.C. 513 , 329 S.E.2d 402 (1985). 1989To support the proposition that evidence of other crimes is permissible only as rebuttal evidence, he emphasizes the following statement by this court in Streath : "[U]nless the defendant presents alibi evidence, evidence of other crimes to show identity, either directly or indirectly (common plan), should not be admitted under McClain." State v. Streath, 73 N.C.App. 546, 550 , 327 S.E.2d 240, 242 , disc. rev. denied, 313 N.C. 513 , 329 S.E.2d 402 (1985).	1	1989–1989
State v. Upright neutral nc · 1985 1 sentence 1989To support the proposition that evidence of other crimes is permissible only as rebuttal evidence, he emphasizes the following statement by this court in Streath : "[U]nless the defendant presents alibi evidence, evidence of other crimes to show identity, either directly or indirectly (common plan), should not be admitted under McClain." State v. Streath, 73 N.C.App. 546, 550 , 327 S.E.2d 240, 242 , disc. rev. denied, 313 N.C. 513 , 329 S.E.2d 402 (1985).	1	1989–1989
State v. Streath green nc · 1985 1 sentence 1989To support the proposition that evidence of other crimes is permissible only as rebuttal evidence, he emphasizes the following statement by this court in Streath : "[U]nless the defendant presents alibi evidence, evidence of other crimes to show identity, either directly or indirectly (common plan), should not be admitted under McClain." State v. Streath, 73 N.C.App. 546, 550 , 327 S.E.2d 240, 242 , disc. rev. denied, 313 N.C. 513 , 329 S.E.2d 402 (1985).	1	1989–1989
State v. McClain green nc · 1954 2 sentences 1989Id. at 175 , 81 S.E.2d at 366 . 435 The defendant argues on appeal that the identity exception does not apply. 1989Id. at 175 , 81 S.E.2d at 366 . 435 The defendant argues on appeal that the identity exception does not apply.	1	1989–1989
State v. Thomas green nc · 1984 2 sentences 1988Defendant relies upon both State v. Thomas, 310 N.C. 369 , 312 S.E. 2d 458 (1984); and State v. Moore, 309 N.C. 102 , 305 S.E. 2d 542 (1983), in order to support her contention that “in order for evidence to be admissible under the identity exception the circumstances of the two crimes must be such as to tend to show that the crime charged and the other offense were committed by the same person.” In fact, this contention lends greater credence to our view that the challenged testimony is not the sort contemplated in N.C.R. 1988Defendant relies upon both State v. Thomas, 310 N.C. 369 , 312 S.E. 2d 458 (1984); and State v. Moore, 309 N.C. 102 , 305 S.E. 2d 542 (1983), in order to support her contention that “in order for evidence to be admissible under the identity exception the circumstances of the two crimes must be such as to tend to show that the crime charged and the other offense were committed by the same person.” In fact, this contention lends greater credence to our view that the challenged testimony is not the sort contemplated in N.C.R.	1	1988–1988
State v. Gilchrist green ncctapp · 1984 1 sentence 1987This Court in State v. Gilchrist, 71 N.C.	1	1987–1987
State v. Freeman neutral nc · 1983 1 sentence 1987"Nondisclosure of an informant's identity is a privilege justified by the need for effective law enforcement...." State v. Grainger, 60 N.C.App. 188, 190 , 298 S.E.2d 203, 204 (1982), disc. rev. denied, 307 N.C. 579 , 299 S.E.2d 648 (1983).	1	1987–1987
State v. Grainger neutral nc · 1983 1 sentence 1987"Nondisclosure of an informant's identity is a privilege justified by the need for effective law enforcement...." State v. Grainger, 60 N.C.App. 188, 190 , 298 S.E.2d 203, 204 (1982), disc. rev. denied, 307 N.C. 579 , 299 S.E.2d 648 (1983).	1	1987–1987
State v. Pace green ncctapp · 1981 1 sentence 1985The defendant cites State v. Pace, 51 N.C.	1	1985–1985
Roviaro v. United States green scotus · 1957 2 sentences 1982Roviaro v. United States, 353 U.S. 53 , 77 S.Ct. 623 , 1 L.Ed. 2d 639 (1957); State v. Watson, 303 N.C. 533 , 279 S.E. 2d 580 (1981); State v. Brown, 29 N.C. 1982Roviaro v. United States, 353 U.S. 53 , 77 S.Ct. 623 , 1 L.Ed. 2d 639 (1957); State v. Watson, 303 N.C. 533 , 279 S.E. 2d 580 (1981); State v. Brown, 29 N.C.	1	1982–1982
State v. Watson green nc · 1981 2 sentences 1982Roviaro v. United States, 353 U.S. 53 , 77 S.Ct. 623 , 1 L.Ed. 2d 639 (1957); State v. Watson, 303 N.C. 533 , 279 S.E. 2d 580 (1981); State v. Brown, 29 N.C. 1982Roviaro v. United States, 353 U.S. 53 , 77 S.Ct. 623 , 1 L.Ed. 2d 639 (1957); State v. Watson, 303 N.C. 533 , 279 S.E. 2d 580 (1981); State v. Brown, 29 N.C.	1	1982–1982
State v. Brown neutral ncctapp · 1976 1 sentence 1982Roviaro v. United States, 353 U.S. 53 , 77 S.Ct. 623 , 1 L.Ed. 2d 639 (1957); State v. Watson, 303 N.C. 533 , 279 S.E. 2d 580 (1981); State v. Brown, 29 N.C.	1	1982–1982

Where else courts name it

AL 66 (1906–2015) CT 65 (1982–2026) NY 42 (1852–2026) TX 38 (1932–2025) IL 25 (1976–2022) PA 25 (1979–2026) IN 25 (1972–2025) CA 20 (1887–2025) MO 18 (1976–2019) MD 17 (1941–2025) AZ 15 (1967–2020) IA 12 (1914–2017) NM 12 (1977–2024) GA 11 (1980–2025) FL 11 (1980–2021) DC 10 (1976–2020) NC 9 (1982–2014) OH 8 (1933–2022) TN 8 (1997–2015) WA 7 (1976–2024) OR 6 (1976–2006) NV 6 (1978–2020) MN 6 (1972–2016) OK 5 (1980–2020) VA 4 (1969–2000) KS 4 (1991–2026) MT 3 (2010–2020) CO 3 (1988–2021) MA 3 (1990–2015) SD 2 (1979–1992) ID 2 (1977–2013) WI 2 (1999–2005) SC 2 (2020–2025) WV 2 (1983–2013) MS 2 (2005–2007) HI 2 (1978–2013)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check