State v. Holder
Annotate this Case113 S.E.2d 15 (1960)
252 N.C. 121
STATE v. Forest M. HOLDER.
No. 145.
Supreme Court of North Carolina.
March 2, 1960.
Malcolm B. Seawell, Atty. Gen., Glenn L. Hooper, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Mullen, Holland & Cooke, Gastonia, by Frank P. Cooke, Gastonia, for defendant, appellant.
PER CURIAM.
The defendant asked for a new trial solely upon the ground that the court committed *16 error in recapitulating the defendant's evidence and contentions and that he was prejudiced by the reference to the treatment for alcoholism.
Inadvertence in stating the contentions or in recapitulating the evidence must be called to the attention of the court in time for correction. After verdict the objection comes too late. State v. Adams, 245 N.C. 344, 95 S.E.2d 902.
No error.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
