Repository Collection 03
State v. Larry Lamb
CASE ENTRY
Last Revised • July 11, 2026
This Source Verification Page documents the National Registry of Exonerations case profile for State v. Larry Lamb, cited in Claim III of the Supplemental Motion. The case is referenced as an example of a North Carolina conviction later vacated following allegations of witness coercion, unreliable testimony, suppressed impeachment evidence, and the development of additional exculpatory evidence. Claim III cites this source as supporting authority concerning official misconduct, wrongful convictions, and post-conviction relief.
Related SMAR Citation
“State v. Larry Lamb: Duplin Co. Sheriff's detectives coerced witness; prosecutor failed to disclose contradictory statements and compensation arrangement led to vacatur.”
Case Name
State v. Larry Lamb
Location
Duplin County, North Carolina
Convicted
1993
Exonerated
2013
Verification Source
The National Registry of Exonerations
Source Location
The National Registry of Exonerations
Highlighted Pages
1 - 4
Referenced in the Supplemental Motion
Page 59, Paragraph 121
Source Status
✔ Obtained and reviewed.
✔ Relevant passages highlighted.
✔ Publicly available source.
✔ Included within the Source Verification Archive.
Cited to Support
Lyle C. May alleges that North Carolina courts have granted post-conviction relief in cases involving unreliable witness testimony, coercive investigative practices, suppressed impeachment evidence, and later-developed exculpatory evidence. The Larry Lamb case is cited as an example in which a key prosecution witness later recanted her testimony, alleging that law enforcement officers coached and pressured her into providing false statements, while additional evidence undermined the State's theory of the case and implicated alternative perpetrators. May relies upon Lamb to illustrate that witness coercion, unreliable testimony, and the suppression of material evidence have resulted in vacated convictions and dismissed charges in North Carolina. May cites this authority in support of his request for disclosure of evidence relating to his Buncombe County case arising from the July 1997 murders in Asheville, North Carolina.
Supporting Documents
Original Article
Link to the original article.
Highlighted Research Copy
Working research copy containing the highlighted passages cited in the Supplemental Motion.
Continue Your Research
Return to Claim III
Continue browsing the sources cited throughout Claim III.
Return to Source Verification Archive
Return to the main Source Verification Archive and explore additional sections of the Supplemental Motion.