State v. . Brown

150 S.E. 635, 198 N.C. 41, 1929 N.C. LEXIS 401
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided December 4, 1929·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

There is evidence on behalf of the State tending to show that on 8 September, 1928, the tires and guns in question were checked into car No. 115311 for shipment over the Southern Railway to Mor-ganton and Swannanoa. The car was sealed and remained sealed until it reached Connelly Springs, where the seal was broken, and the articles found missing. Soon thereafter, the defendants were discovered in possession of the guns and tires in question, with the numbers on the tires obliterated. They offered to sell the tires for less than half their value, and wanted to pawn or sell the guns.

It is the contention of the defendant that he cannot be convicted on the third count in the bill of indictment in the face of an acquittal on the first two counts; that the evidence of recent possession applies alike to all counts; and that as he was not convicted on the first two, he must necessarily be acquitted on the third.

The defendant’s logic is better than his law. S. v. Sisk, 185 N. C., 696, 116 S. E., 721. Notwithstanding his acquittal on the first two counts, on which the jury may have pardoned him, there was- evidence tending to support the third, and we cannot say, as a matter of law, that the verdict is contradictory. S. v. Record, 151 N. C., 695, 65 S. E., 1010.

We find no reversible error on the record, hence the verdict and judgment will be upheld.

No error.

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

State v. . Brown, 150 S.E. 635, 198 N.C. 41, 1929 N.C. LEXIS 401 (N.C. 1929).

150 S.E. 635 (State v. . Brown) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Amerson
137 S.E.2d 284 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1964)
Dunn v. United States
284 U.S. 390 (Supreme Court, 1932)
State v. Armijo
2 P.2d 1075 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1931)