concluding that a superior court order allowing motion to suppress did not end a criminal case because, even if the ruling "may have the same ‘effect’ of a final order," it "requires further action for finality"
Summary of this case from State v. WoolardNo. 262P09.
April 14, 2010.
Case below: 197 N.C. App. ___ (19 May 2009).
State's Conditional PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31.
Dismissed as Moot.
concluding that a superior court order allowing motion to suppress did not end a criminal case because, even if the ruling "may have the same ‘effect’ of a final order," it "requires further action for finality"
Summary of this case from State v. WoolardFull title:State v. Fowler
Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina
Date published: Apr 14, 2010
Though it excludes portions of the State’s evidence, it requires "further action by the trial court in order…
State v. OsterhoudtWe note that the State is correct in its concession that it has no statutory right of appeal from a superior…