N.C. Gen. Stat. » Chapter 15
NC General Statutes

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15-149 (2026)

Description in bill for larceny of money

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NCLEGncleg.gov (official) JustiaChapter 15 CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

In every indictment in which it is necessary to make any averment as to the larceny of any money, or United States treasury note, or any note of any bank whatsoever, it is sufficient to describe such money, or treasury note, or bank note, simply as money, without specifying any particular coin, or treasury note, or bank note; and such allegation, so far as regards the description of the property, shall be sustained by proof of any amount of coin, or treasury note, or bank note, although the particular species of coin, of which such amount was composed, or the particular nature of the treasury note, or bank note, shall not be proven. (1876-7, c. 68; Code, s. 1190; Rev., s. 3251; C.S., s. 4619.)

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2016–2018 · leading case: State v. Mostafavi, 802 S.E.2d 508 (N.C. Ct. App. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Mostafavi, 802 S.E.2d 508 (N.C. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 32× “currency" relying on N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15-149 , which was originally codified in 1877.”
State v. Ricks, 781 S.E.2d 637 (N.C. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 24× “Even so, the statement rested on the faulty precedent of Smith which did not rely on N.C. Gen.Stat. § 15-149. *645 In our decision we cannot ignore a statute directly on point.”
State v. Crowder, 795 S.E.2d 833 (N.C. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 8× “any averment as to the larceny of any money, or United States treasury note, or any note of any bank whatsoever, it is sufficient to describe such money, or treasury note, or bank note, simply as money, without specifying any particular coin, or treasury note, or bank note; and…”
State v. Mostafavi, 811 S.E.2d 138 (N.C. 2018). “§ 15-149 (2017). Here the indictment charged defendant with two counts of obtaining property by false pretenses and mirrors the language of the controlling statute, N.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.