State v. . Carpenter

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. . Carpenter

16 S.E. 339, 111 N.C. 706

DecidedSeptember 5, 1892

StatusPublished

This text of 16 S.E. 339 (State v. . Carpenter) 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

State v. . Carpenter, 16 S.E. 339, 111 N.C. 706 (N.C. 1892).

Pincite

Opinion

Clark, J :

This was an indictment for carrying conceáled weapons.

There is no case on appeal, and we find no error on the face of the record proper. The judgment therefore must be affirmed. State v. Foster, 110 N. C., 510.

It is true that there appears in the record a motion to quash the indictment, which was overruled and an exception entered. As the indictment is in the usual form, we are at a loss to conjecture on what ground the motion to quash was made, unless upon the ground of want of jurisdiction. But it has been often held that the Superior Court being a Court of general jurisdiction, the burden is on the defendant, in cases like this of which a Justice of the Peace has original jurisdiction, to show that the indictment was found within less than twelve months after the offence was committed. State v. *707 Kerby, 110 N. C., 558. Besides, it appears in the record that there was an interval of twelve months after the presentment before indictment found. The twelve months is counted prior to the indictment found, not prior to the presentment. State v. Cooper, 104 N. C., 890. Hence, in fact, it affirmatively appears in the record here that the Superior Court had acquired jurisdiction. e Affirmed.

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

Clark, J :

This was an indictment for carrying conceáled weapons.

There is no case on appeal, and we find no error on the face of the record proper. The judgment therefore must be affirmed. State v. Foster, 110 N. C., 510.

It is true that there appears in the record a motion to quash the indictment, which was overruled and an exception entered. As the indictment is in the usual form, we are at a loss to conjecture on what ground the motion to quash was made, unless upon the ground of want of jurisdiction. But it has been often held that the Superior Court being a Court of general jurisdiction, the burden is on the defendant, in cases like this of which a Justice of the Peace has original jurisdiction, to show that the indictment was found within less than twelve months after the offence was committed. State v. *707 Kerby, 110 N. C., 558. Besides, it appears in the record that there was an interval of twelve months after the presentment before indictment found. The twelve months is counted prior to the indictment found, not prior to the presentment. State v. Cooper, 104 N. C., 890. Hence, in fact, it affirmatively appears in the record here that the Superior Court had acquired jurisdiction. e Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 S.E. 339, 111 N.C. 706, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-carpenter-nc-1892.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack