From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Woodward

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Aug 1, 1986
347 S.E.2d 435 (N.C. 1986)

Opinion

No. 353PA86

Filed 29 August 1986

BEFORE Battle, J., at the 24 June 1985 Session of Superior Court, WAKE County, the order of the District Court dismissing the citation charging defendant with Driving While Impaired was affirmed. Upon the State's appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the judgment of the Superior Court in a decision reported at 80 N.C. App. 725, 343 S.E.2d 291 (1986). The defendant's petition under N.C.G.S. 7A-31 for discretionary review of the decision of the Court of Appeals was allowed on 28 August 1986.

Bode, Call Green, by Howard S. Kohn, for defendant appellant.

Lacy H. Thornburg, Attorney General, by Isaac T. Avery, III, Special Deputy Attorney General, for the State appellee.


In reversing the judgment of the superior court which affirmed the order of the district court judge dismissing the case against the defendant for failure of the State to prosecute, the Court of Appeals held that the district court judge abused his discretion.

The test of whether a trial court has abused its discretion has been stated as follows:

A ruling committed to the trial court's discretion is to be accorded great deference and will be upset only upon a showing that it was so arbitrary that it could not have been the result of a reasoned decision.

White v. White, 312 N.C. 770, 324 S.E.2d 829 (1985).

Applying this test to the findings of fact entered by Judge Cashwell in entering his order of dismissal, we conclude that his ruling was not an abuse of discretion. We therefore reverse the Court of Appeals.

Reversed.


Summaries of

State v. Woodward

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Aug 1, 1986
347 S.E.2d 435 (N.C. 1986)
Case details for

State v. Woodward

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JOHN DAVIDSON WOODWARD

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Aug 1, 1986

Citations

347 S.E.2d 435 (N.C. 1986)
347 S.E.2d 435

Citing Cases

State v. Cooke

A judge does not abuse his discretion unless his decision is "so arbitrary that it could not have been the…