STATE v. PRATT

No. 197A82.

295 S.E.2d 462 (1982)

STATE of North Carolina v. Lacy Lee PRATT.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 5, 1982.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Rufus L. Edmisten, Atty. Gen. by Barry S. McNeill, Asst. Atty. Gen., Raleigh, for the State.

Millicent Gibson, Robbins, for defendant-appellant.


BRANCH, Chief Justice.

Defendant first contends the trial court erred in permitting lay opinion testimony regarding the similarity of shoeprints found at the crime scenes and the design on the sole of the tennis shoes defendant was wearing at the time of his arrest. Officer M. B. Mullinix was permitted to testify, over defendant's objection, that in his opinion defendant's Converse tennis shoes were the same shoes that had made the impressions in the sand at the ...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases