State v. Bagnard

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Bagnard

211 S.E.2d 471, 24 N.C. App. 566, 1975 N.C. App. LEXIS 2433

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedFebruary 5, 1975

DocketNo. 743SC918

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 211 S.E.2d 471 (State v. Bagnard) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Bagnard, 211 S.E.2d 471, 24 N.C. App. 566, 1975 N.C. App. LEXIS 2433 (N.C. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

HEDRICK, Judge.

The general rule is that, for an indictment to be valid, the name of the accused must be alleged in a manner sufficient to identify him with certainty. Annot., 15 A.L.R. 3d 968. The indictment or information must describe an accused in such a manner as to identify him as the person charged, and if the accused’s name does not appear in the indictment or information, particularly in the part which charges the offense, the charge is fatally defective. 42 C.J.S., Indictments and Informations, Sec. 127, p. 1015; State v. Finch, 218 N.C. 511, 11 S.E. 2d 547 (1940). A warrant or bill of indictment is defective where the defendant is not clearly and positively charged with the commission of the purported offense. State v. Hammonds, 241 N.C. 226, 85 S.E. 2d 133 (1954).

[568]*568Nowhere in the body or charging portion of the' bills of indictment upon which these prosecutions are bottomed- and judgment entered is Vaughn Bagnard identified by name or otherwise. Whether this fatal defect is cured by the appearance of Vaughn Bagnard’s name in the title to the bills is not presented, because the charging portions of the bills refer only to an unidentified “John Doe AKA ‘Varne’

Because the judgment entered against Vaughn Bagnard is not supported by proper bills of indictment against him, it must be arrested. If so advised, the State may proceed against Vaughn Bagnard on proper bills of indictment.

Judgment arrested.

Chief Judge Brock and Judge Parker concur.

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

HEDRICK, Judge.

The general rule is that, for an indictment to be valid, the name of the accused must be alleged in a manner sufficient to identify him with certainty. Annot., 15 A.L.R. 3d 968. The indictment or information must describe an accused in such a manner as to identify him as the person charged, and if the accused’s name does not appear in the indictment or information, particularly in the part which charges the offense, the charge is fatally defective. 42 C.J.S., Indictments and Informations, Sec. 127, p. 1015; State v. Finch, 218 N.C. 511, 11 S.E. 2d 547 (1940). A warrant or bill of indictment is defective where the defendant is not clearly and positively charged with the commission of the purported offense. State v. Hammonds, 241 N.C. 226, 85 S.E. 2d 133 (1954).

[568]*568Nowhere in the body or charging portion of the' bills of indictment upon which these prosecutions are bottomed- and judgment entered is Vaughn Bagnard identified by name or otherwise. Whether this fatal defect is cured by the appearance of Vaughn Bagnard’s name in the title to the bills is not presented, because the charging portions of the bills refer only to an unidentified “John Doe AKA ‘Varne’

Because the judgment entered against Vaughn Bagnard is not supported by proper bills of indictment against him, it must be arrested. If so advised, the State may proceed against Vaughn Bagnard on proper bills of indictment.

Judgment arrested.

Chief Judge Brock and Judge Parker concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

211 S.E.2d 471, 24 N.C. App. 566, 1975 N.C. App. LEXIS 2433, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-bagnard-ncctapp-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack