{
  "id": 790259,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. PHILLIP MANNING CANNADA",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Cannada",
  "decision_date": "1995-04-07",
  "docket_number": "No. 227A94",
  "first_page": "101",
  "last_page": "102",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "340 N.C. 101"
    }
  ],
  "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": "442 S.E.2d 344",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1994,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "parenthetical": "Greene, J., dissenting"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "114 N.C. App. 552",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8527810
      ],
      "year": 1994,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "parenthetical": "Greene, J., dissenting"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/114/0552-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 122,
    "char_count": 1418,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.729,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 9.11516285603474e-08,
      "percentile": 0.5068341822245235
    },
    "sha256": "f8d7e49a9b706f701aea325740e1108773d0387a5fe5e1dc2d62604f676789f2",
    "simhash": "1:e95bb29d63aec1cd",
    "word_count": 225
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:34:40.112900+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. PHILLIP MANNING CANNADA"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER CURIAM.\nThe decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed for the reasons stated in Judge Greene\u2019s dissenting opinion pertaining to the sufficiency of the evidence. Therefore, the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for consideration of any other issues properly raised in defendant\u2019s appeal to that court.\nREVERSED AND REMANDED.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER CURIAM."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Michael F. Easley, Attorney General, by Francis W. Crawley, Special Deputy Attorney General, for the State-appellant.",
      "Malcolm Ray Hunter, Jr., Appellate Defender, by Constance H. Everhart, Assistant Appellate Defender, for defendant-appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. PHILLIP MANNING CANNADA\nNo. 227A94\n(Filed 7 April 1995)\nHomicide \u00a7 299 (NCI4th)\u2014 second-degree murder \u2014 sufficient evidence\nA decision of the Court of Appeals that the evidence was insufficient to support defendant\u2019s conviction of second-degree murder is reversed for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals.\nAm Jur 2d, Homicide \u00a7\u00a7 425 et seq.\nAppeal by the State pursuant to N.C.G.S. \u00a7 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 114 N.C. App. 552, 442 S.E.2d 344 (1994) (Greene, J., dissenting), finding that the trial court erred by failing to dismiss this case at the close of the evidence because the evidence was insufficient, as a matter of law, to support defendant\u2019s conviction of second-degree murder. Heard in the Supreme Court 13 March 1995.\nMichael F. Easley, Attorney General, by Francis W. Crawley, Special Deputy Attorney General, for the State-appellant.\nMalcolm Ray Hunter, Jr., Appellate Defender, by Constance H. Everhart, Assistant Appellate Defender, for defendant-appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0101-01",
  "first_page_order": 133,
  "last_page_order": 134
}