- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
STATE v. EARWOOD
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jun 1, 1876
Important Paras
- The declarations of one of the alleged conspirators, made in the absence of the others, after the transaction was over, (211) introduced by the State to prove the conspiracy, were clearly incompetent against any one except himself. There is error.
Evidence — Declarations.
The declarations of an alleged conspirator, made in the absence of his coconspirators after the transaction, are not competent evidence against any one except the party making such declarations.
READE, J.
The declarations of one of the alleged conspirators, made in the absence of the others, after the transaction was over, (211) introduced by the State to prove the conspiracy, were clearly incompetent against any one except himself. There is error.
PER CURIAM. Venire de novo.
Cited: S. v. Jackson, 82 N.C. 568; S. v. Van Pelt, 136 N.C. 645.
x
Alert
Please log in or sign up for a free trial to access this feature.