State v. . Burns

80 N.C. 376
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided January 5, 1879·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Ashe, J.

There were some exceptions taken by the defendant on the trial below, but it is only necessary to notice that taken to the form of the indictment.

The bill of indictment does not charge that the lien was in force when the bale of cotton was disposed o£ nor to whom it was sold. For- these reasons' the bill is fatally defective, and the judgment below must be arrested. State v. Pickens, 79 N. C., 652.

There is error. Let this be certified to the superior court of Wake county that the defendant may be discharged.

Pek Curai-mx Errors

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

State v. . Burns, 80 N.C. 376 (N.C. 1879).

80 N.C. 376 (State v. . Burns) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Helms
102 S.E.2d 241 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1958)
State v. . Holmes
26 S.E. 692 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1897)
State v. . Van Doran
13 S.E. 32 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1891)
State v. . Farmer
10 S.E. 563 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1889)