{
  "id": 3736407,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. DESPERADOS, INC. and CYNTHIA L. PEREZ",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Desperados, Inc.",
  "decision_date": "2007-11-09",
  "docket_number": "No. 629A06",
  "first_page": "682",
  "last_page": "683",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "361 N.C. 682"
    }
  ],
  "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": "638 S.E.2d 4",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "case_ids": [
        12637380
      ],
      "year": 2006,
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/se2d/638/0004-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "180 N.C. App. 378",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8242493
      ],
      "year": 2006,
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/180/0378-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 122,
    "char_count": 1412,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.701,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.10963438408957434
    },
    "sha256": "e9ed752791d88c317eea6da00fe4a846f3d27e2b49feed2dd488623ba99d87ec",
    "simhash": "1:2d4ae2ba372046ff",
    "word_count": 228
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:19:48.141297+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Justice HUDSON did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. DESPERADOS, INC. and CYNTHIA L. PEREZ"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER CURIAM.\nThe constitutional issue addressed in the Court of Appeals\u2019 majority opinion was not raised and preserved in the trial court and, therefore, was not properly before the Court of Appeals. N.C. R. App. P. 10(b)(1). Accordingly, the decision of the Court of Appeals as to the constitutional issue is reversed, and the case remanded to the Court of Appeals for determination of the remaining issues on their merits.\nREVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED.\nJustice HUDSON did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER CURIAM."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Roy Cooper, Attorney General, by John G. Barnwell, Assistant Attorney General, for the State-appellant.",
      "Jeffrey S. Miller for defendant-appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. DESPERADOS, INC. and CYNTHIA L. PEREZ\nNo. 629A06\n(Filed 9 November 2007)\nAppeal and Error\u2014 preservation of issues \u2014 constitutional question \u2014 failure to raise in trial court\nThe constitutional issue addressed in the majority opinion of the Court of Appeals was not raised and preserved in the trial court and, therefore, was not properly before the Court of Appeals.\nAppeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. \u00a7 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 180 N.C. App. 378, 638 S.E.2d 4 (2006), vacating defendants\u2019 convictions which resulted in judgments entered 13 January 2005 by Judge Thomas D. Haigwood in Superior Court, Beaufort County. Heard in the Supreme Court 17 October 2007.\nRoy Cooper, Attorney General, by John G. Barnwell, Assistant Attorney General, for the State-appellant.\nJeffrey S. Miller for defendant-appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0682-01",
  "first_page_order": 740,
  "last_page_order": 741
}