State v. . Daniels

148 S.E. 244, 197 N.C. 285, 1929 N.C. LEXIS 212
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMay 22, 1929
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 148 S.E. 244 (State v. . Daniels) 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. . Daniels, 148 S.E. 244, 197 N.C. 285, 1929 N.C. LEXIS 212 (N.C. 1929).

Opinion

Pee Oubiam.

Tbe defendant was indicted for a breach of the prohibition laws. The State’s evidence tended to show that after the defendant’s car had been overtaken and stopped by an officer three seats were removed and three cases of whiskey (21 gallons) were found under quilts, and that farther back under the seat were 2% gallons of liquor in half-gallon fruit jars. The defendant was the driver of the ear. Immediately after his arrest he was taken to the courthouse; an indictment was prepared and returned as “a true bill”; the case was then called in less than an hour after the arrest and the defendant pleaded guilty. He made no motion for a continuance or for time to employ and confer with counsel or for a subpoena for witnesses. Time to employ counsel or to get witnesses was not denied the defendant by the court, but was waived by the defendant when he entered his plea and admitted his guilt. In the absence of a motion for a reasonable continuance an exception to the short time intervening between the arrest and the arraignment does not constitute sufficient cause for a new trial.

The third assignment of error is that the sentence was excessive, but as it was authorized by the law it cannot be held to be “cruel or unusual” within the contemplation of Art. I, sec. 14, of the Constitution. S. v. Manuel, 20 N. C., 144; S. v. Pettie, 80 N. C., 367; S. v. Farrington, 141 N. C., 844; S. v. Dowdy, 145 N. C., 432.

No error.

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

Related

State v. Tirado
Supreme Court of North Carolina, 2025
State v. Powell
169 S.E.2d 210 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1969)
State v. Reed
165 S.E.2d 674 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1969)
State v. Yoes
157 S.E.2d 386 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1967)
State v. Lovelace
157 S.E.2d 81 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1967)
State v. Wilson
154 S.E.2d 102 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1967)
State v. LePard
153 S.E.2d 875 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1967)
State v. Brooks
132 S.E.2d 354 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1963)
State v. Downey
117 S.E.2d 39 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1960)
State v. Smith
76 S.E.2d 363 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1953)
State v. Stansbury
55 S.E.2d 185 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1949)
State v. . Crandall
33 S.E.2d 861 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1945)
State v. . Reddick
23 S.E.2d 909 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1943)
State v. Calcutt
219 N.C. 545 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1941)
State v. . Brackett
11 S.E.2d 146 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940)
State v. . Moschoures
199 S.E. 92 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1938)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
148 S.E. 244, 197 N.C. 285, 1929 N.C. LEXIS 212, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-daniels-nc-1929.