midpage

State v. FlinchemState v. Flinchem

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Nov 6, 1957
363
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Winborne
Winborne, C. J.:

Among the exceptions taken by defendant in the course of the trial ‍​‌​​‌​​​​​​‌​‌​​​​​​‌‌‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‍in Superior Court, this Court is of opinion that the matter of exclusion of testimony of the witness Dowell to which Exception No. 8 is directed, ‍​‌​​‌​​​​​​‌​‌​​​​​​‌‌‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‍constitutes error prejudicial to defendant, and entitles him to a new trial.

In this State a lay witness is competent to testify whether or not in his opinion ‍​‌​​‌​​​​​​‌​‌​​​​​​‌‌‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‍a person was under the influence of an intoxicant on a given occasion on which the witness observed him. See S. v. Willard, 241 N.C. 259, 84 S.E. 2d, 899, ‍​‌​​‌​​​​​​‌​‌​​​​​​‌‌‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‍and cases there cited.

*121 Since there is to be a new trial, it is not deemed expedient to treat other assignments of error. The matters to which ‍​‌​​‌​​​​​​‌​‌​​​​​​‌‌‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‍they relate may not then recur.

For error pointed out, let there be a

New trial.

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Flinchem
Court Name: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Date Published: Nov 6, 1957
Citations: 247 N.C. 118; 100 S.E.2d 206; 1957 N.C. LEXIS 531; 363
Docket Number: 363
Court Abbreviation: N.C.
Log In