State v. McClaude, 237 N.C. App. 350 (Nov. 18, 2014)

In this drug and drug conspiracy case, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying the defendant’s request for additional time to locate an alleged co-conspirator and his motion to reopen the evidence so that witness could testify when he was located after the jury reached a verdict. The trial court acted within its authority given that the witness had not been subpoenaed (and thus was not required to be present) and his attorney indicated that he would not testify.

Error | UNC School of Government

Error

The website encountered an unexpected error. Please try again later.