Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 North Carolina opinions name it 1 courts 2016–2018 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Oxendinegreen2 sentences2018App. 502 , ----, 783 S.E.2d 286 , 292, disc. review denied , --- N.C. ----, 787 S.E.2d 24 (2016) ("The first step under plain error review is ... to determine whether any error occurred at all."). *861 *884 Normally, "[t]he standard of review in evaluating the denial of a motion to suppress is whether competent evidence supports the trial court's findings of fact and whether the findings of fact support the conclusions of law." State v. Jackson , 368 N.C. 75 , 78, 772 S.E.2d 847 , 849 (2015) (citation and quotation marks omitted). 2017App. ----, ----, 783 S.E.2d 286 , 292, disc. reviewdenied , --- N.C. ----, 787 S.E.2d 24 (2016) ( "The first step under plain error review is ... to determine whether any error occurred at all."). | 4 | 7 |
State v. Oxendinegreen2 sentences2018App. 502 , ----, 783 S.E.2d 286 , 292, disc. review denied , --- N.C. ----, 787 S.E.2d 24 (2016) ("The first step under plain error review is ... to determine whether any error occurred at all."). *861 *884 Normally, "[t]he standard of review in evaluating the denial of a motion to suppress is whether competent evidence supports the trial court's findings of fact and whether the findings of fact support the conclusions of law." State v. Jackson , 368 N.C. 75 , 78, 772 S.E.2d 847 , 849 (2015) (citation and quotation marks omitted). 2017App. ----, ----, 783 S.E.2d 286 , 292, disc. reviewdenied , --- N.C. ----, 787 S.E.2d 24 (2016) ( "The first step under plain error review is ... to determine whether any error occurred at all."). | 3 | 5 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Jackson
green
2 sentences2018App. 502 , ----, 783 S.E.2d 286 , 292, disc. review denied , --- N.C. ----, 787 S.E.2d 24 (2016) ("The first step under plain error review is ... to determine whether any error occurred at all."). *861 *884 Normally, "[t]he standard of review in evaluating the denial of a motion to suppress is whether competent evidence supports the trial court's findings of fact and whether the findings of fact support the conclusions of law." State v. Jackson , 368 N.C. 75 , 78, 772 S.E.2d 847 , 849 (2015) (citation and quotation marks omitted). 2017"The standard of review in evaluating the denial of a motion to suppress is whether competent evidence supports the trial court's findings of fact and whether the findings of fact support the conclusions of law." State v. Jackson , 368 N.C. 75 , 78, 772 S.E.2d 847 , 849 (2015) (citation and quotation marks omitted). | 2 | 2017–2018 |
State v. Lenoir
green
1 sentence2018App. ----, ----, 816 S.E.2d 880 , 883 (2018) (quoting State v. Oxendine , 246 N.C. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.