In Re Burnett

Supreme Court of North Carolina

In Re Burnett

36 S.E.2d 75, 225 N.C. 646

DecidedNovember 28, 1945

StatusPublished

This text of 36 S.E.2d 75 (In Re Burnett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In Re Burnett, 36 S.E.2d 75, 225 N.C. 646 (N.C. 1945).

Pincite

Opinion

Petitioner was duly committed to the Jackson Training School. On 19 February, 1945, he was released on parole. On 12 July, 1945, acting on a telephonic revocation of the parole, the probation officer of New Hanover County ordered his arrest. Writ of habeas corpus, after hearing, was denied and petitioner was recommitted. Thereupon, on his petition, writ ofcertiorari issued from this Court. *Page 647 On 16 July, 1945, the date of the hearing below, petitioner's parole was revoked in due form. G.S., 134-85. He is now lawfully detained. The legality of his original arrest and detention is presently academic. Hence the motion of the Attorney-General to dismiss must be allowed. Cochran v.Rowe, ante, 645; Martin v. Sloan, 69 N.C. 128; S. v. R. R., 74 N.C. 287;Waters v. Boyd, 179 N.C. 180, 102 S.E. 196; Trade Association v.Doughton, 192 N.C. 384, 135 S.E. 131; Board of Education v. Comrs. ofJohnston, 198 N.C. 430, 152 S.E. 156; Efird v. Comrs. of Forsyth,217 N.C. 691, 9 S.E.2d 466.

Petition dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Petitioner was duly committed to the Jackson Training School. On 19 February, 1945, he was released on parole. On 12 July, 1945, acting on a telephonic revocation of the parole, the probation officer of New Hanover County ordered his arrest. Writ of habeas corpus, after hearing, was denied and petitioner was recommitted. Thereupon, on his petition, writ ofcertiorari issued from this Court. *Page 647 On 16 July, 1945, the date of the hearing below, petitioner's parole was revoked in due form. G.S., 134-85. He is now lawfully detained. The legality of his original arrest and detention is presently academic. Hence the motion of the Attorney-General to dismiss must be allowed. Cochran v.Rowe, ante, 645; Martin v. Sloan, 69 N.C. 128; S. v. R. R., 74 N.C. 287;Waters v. Boyd, 179 N.C. 180, 102 S.E. 196; Trade Association v.Doughton, 192 N.C. 384, 135 S.E. 131; Board of Education v. Comrs. ofJohnston, 198 N.C. 430, 152 S.E. 156; Efird v. Comrs. of Forsyth,217 N.C. 691, 9 S.E.2d 466.

Petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 S.E.2d 75, 225 N.C. 646, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-burnett-nc-1945.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack