State v. Cambpell

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Cambpell

188 S.E.2d 754, 14 N.C. App. 633, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 2201

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedMay 24, 1972

DocketNo. 7222SC401

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 188 S.E.2d 754 (State v. Cambpell) 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. Cambpell, 188 S.E.2d 754, 14 N.C. App. 633, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 2201 (N.C. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

CAMPBELL, Judge.

The defendant assigns as error the signing and entering of the judgment.

We think this assignment of error is good but not for the reasons argued in the brief.

[635]*635The defendant tendered a plea of guilty of “temporary larceny of an automobile,” a purported violation of General Statutes 20-105, “Unlawful taking of a vehicle.” He was not charged with such violation and he could not be convicted of this statutory offense upon trial on a bill of indictment for larceny. State v. McCrary, 263 N.C. 490, 139 S.E. 2d 739 (1965).

As stated in State v. Wall, 271 N.C. 675, 157 S.E. 2d 363 (1967) : “Under our decisions, the statutory criminal offense defined in G.S. 20-105, sometimes referred to as ‘temporary larceny,’ is not an included less degree of the crime of larceny; and a defendant may not be convicted of a violation of G.S. 20-105 when tried upon a bill of indictment charging the crime of larceny. . . .”

Reversed.

Chief Judge Mallard and Judge Brock concur.

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