State v. . Dunlap

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. . Dunlap

181 S.E. 275, 208 N.C. 432, 1935 N.C. LEXIS 440

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedSeptember 18, 1935

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 181 S.E. 275 (State v. . Dunlap) 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. . Dunlap, 181 S.E. 275, 208 N.C. 432, 1935 N.C. LEXIS 440 (N.C. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

At the March Term, 1935, Buncombe Superior Court, the defendant herein, Robert Dunlap, was tried upon indictment charging him with the murder of one Pauline McMellan, alias Ola McMellan, which resulted in a conviction of murder in the first degree and sentence of death. From the judgment thus entered, the defendant gave notice of appeal to the Supreme Court, and by consent was allowed sixty days within which to make out and serve statement of case on appeal. The clerk certifies that nothing has been done towards perfecting the appeal; that the time for serving statement of case has expired, and that no extension of time for filing same has been recorded in his office. S. v. Williams, ante, 352; S. v. Brown, 206 N. C., 747, 175 S. E., 116.

The prisoner, having failed to make out and serve statement of case on appeal within the time fixed, has lost his right to prosecute the appeal, and the motion of the Attorney-General to docket and dismiss must be allowed. S. v. Williams, supra; S. v. Johnson, 205 N. C., 610, 172 S. E., 219. It is customary, however, in capital cases, where the *433 life of the prisoner is involved, to examine the record to see that no error appears upon its face. S. v. Williams, supra; S. v. Goldston, 201 N. C., 89, 158 S. E., 926. This we have done in the instant ease without discovering any error on the face of the record. S. v. Williams, supra; S. v. Hamlet, 206 N. C., 568, 174 S. E., 451.

The motion of the Attorney-General must be allowed. S. v. Williams, supra, and cases there cited.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Stacy, C. J.

At the March Term, 1935, Buncombe Superior Court, the defendant herein, Robert Dunlap, was tried upon indictment charging him with the murder of one Pauline McMellan, alias Ola McMellan, which resulted in a conviction of murder in the first degree and sentence of death. From the judgment thus entered, the defendant gave notice of appeal to the Supreme Court, and by consent was allowed sixty days within which to make out and serve statement of case on appeal. The clerk certifies that nothing has been done towards perfecting the appeal; that the time for serving statement of case has expired, and that no extension of time for filing same has been recorded in his office. S. v. Williams, ante, 352; S. v. Brown, 206 N. C., 747, 175 S. E., 116.

The prisoner, having failed to make out and serve statement of case on appeal within the time fixed, has lost his right to prosecute the appeal, and the motion of the Attorney-General to docket and dismiss must be allowed. S. v. Williams, supra; S. v. Johnson, 205 N. C., 610, 172 S. E., 219. It is customary, however, in capital cases, where the *433 life of the prisoner is involved, to examine the record to see that no error appears upon its face. S. v. Williams, supra; S. v. Goldston, 201 N. C., 89, 158 S. E., 926. This we have done in the instant ease without discovering any error on the face of the record. S. v. Williams, supra; S. v. Hamlet, 206 N. C., 568, 174 S. E., 451.

The motion of the Attorney-General must be allowed. S. v. Williams, supra, and cases there cited.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

181 S.E. 275, 208 N.C. 432, 1935 N.C. LEXIS 440, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-dunlap-nc-1935.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack