{
  "id": 8567733,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JOHN RHODES",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Rhodes",
  "decision_date": "1982-03-03",
  "docket_number": "No. 152A81",
  "first_page": "294",
  "last_page": "295",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "305 N.C. 294"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "282 S.E. 2d 809",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1981,
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "54 N.C. App. 193",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8521146
      ],
      "year": 1981,
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/54/0193-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 148,
    "char_count": 1566,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.779,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20643655286466508
    },
    "sha256": "8f6600cdd6ac04130e80b6617bb697cc50f02f5f9ba8232c7ed36dcea9c2ee08",
    "simhash": "1:39aa72fb0b23a7e8",
    "word_count": 265
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:52:50.465071+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JOHN RHODES"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER CURIAM.\nAn adequate review of the evidence is contained in the opinion by the Court of Appeals. Defendant contends that the trial court erred in (1) failing to instruct the jury on the defendant\u2019s right to resist an arrest pursuant to an illegal entry into his home, (2) instructing the jury that the defendant\u2019s right to resist excessive force was conditioned on their finding that both Officer Hastings and Officer Workman used excessive force against the defendant, and (3) failing to instruct the jury on defendant\u2019s right to resist an arrest by an officer who does not inform the defendant that he is under arrest.\nWe have carefully reviewed the opinion of the Court of Appeals and the briefs and authorities relating to the defendant\u2019s contentions set out above. We conclude that the result reached by the Court of Appeals, its reasoning, and the legal principles enunciated by it are correct and adopt that opinion as our own.\nThe decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER CURIAM."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Rufus L. Edmisten, Attorney General by Daniel F. McLawhorn, for the State.",
      "Malcolm R. Hunter, Jr., Assistant Appellant Defender, for the Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JOHN RHODES\nNo. 152A81\n(Filed 3 March 1982)\nDEFENDANT appeals from a decision by a divided panel of the Court of Appeals affirming his conviction of resisting an officer in violation of G.S. \u00a7 14-223 upon which he was sentenced to a term of six months imprisonment at the 3 November 1980 Session of Superior Court, GUILFORD County.\nRufus L. Edmisten, Attorney General by Daniel F. McLawhorn, for the State.\nMalcolm R. Hunter, Jr., Assistant Appellant Defender, for the Defendant-Appellant.\n. State v. Rhodes, 54 N.C. App. 193, 282 S.E. 2d 809 (1981)."
  },
  "file_name": "0294-01",
  "first_page_order": 326,
  "last_page_order": 327
}