Criminal Practice – Armed Robbery – Evidence – Out-of-Court Statement – Corroboration – ConstitutionalState v. Mason When a police officer testified about the victim’s statements at the scene of the crime, the trial court instructed the jury that the testimony was being admitted for corroborative purposes only. Since the testimony was not admitted to prove the truth of the matters asserted, defendant’s constitutional right to confront the witnesses against him was not implicated.
You have clicked on a link to
information that is
Already a paid subscriber but not registered for online access yet? For instructions on how to get premium web access, click here.
Interested in Subscribing?
Start by choosing how you'd like your news delivered.
- Print and Digital -
Try North Carolina Lawyers Weekly for a month
Published: August 8, 2012
Time posted: 4:14 pm
Tags: armed robbery, Constitutional, Corroboration, Criminal Practice, evidence, Out-of-Court Statement