State v. . Daniel
This text of 46 S.E.2d 312 (State v. . Daniel) 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.
Opinion
"While the transcript is somewhat deficient, as well as wanting in clarity, we think enough appears on the record, especially in view of the recitals in the judgment, to give us jurisdiction of the appeal. Hence, the motion to dismiss will be overruled. S. v. Daniel, 121 N. C., 574, 28 S. E., 255; S. v. Butts, 91 N. C., 524.
In addition to the peremptoriness of the charge, which seems to have silenced the jury, S. v. Godwin, 227 N. C., 449, 42 S. E. (2d), 617, there is neither plea nor verdict to support the judgment. S. v. Walters, 208 N. C., 391, 180 S. E., 664.
A new trial seems necessary. It is so ordered. See Blake v. Smith, 163 N. C., 274, 79 S. E., 596.
New trial.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
46 S.E.2d 312, 228 N.C. 536, 1948 N.C. LEXIS 263, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-daniel-nc-1948.