State v. . Fowler and Brincefield

172 S.E. 191, 205 N.C. 608, 1934 N.C. LEXIS 28
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided January 10, 1934·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

The evidence is sufficient to carry the case to the jury as against the defendant Fowler. Hence, the verdict and judgment will be upheld as to him.

But with respect to the defendant Brincefield, the evidence does no more than raise a suspicion, somewhat strong perhaps, of his guilt. Therefore, the demurrer to the evidence will be sustained as to him. S. v. Carter, 204 N. C., 304, 168 S. E., 204.

The defendants assail the constitutionality of chapter 434, Public Laws 1933, amending C. S., 4428, which makes the possession of tickets, certificates or orders used in the operation of a lottery prima facie evidence of a violation of said section, but the connection between the fact proved and the ultimate fact presumed seems to be a rational one, hence the objection must fail. S. v. Russell, 164 N. C., 482, 80 S. E., 66; S. v. Wilkerson, 164 N. C., 431, 79 S. E., 888; S. v. Barrett, 138 N. C., 630, 50 S. E., 506.

The case is not like S. v. Griffin, 154 N. C., 611, 70 S. E., 292, cited and relied upon by defendants.

Eeversed as to defendant Brincefield.

No error as to defendant Fowler.

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

State v. . Fowler and Brincefield, 172 S.E. 191, 205 N.C. 608, 1934 N.C. LEXIS 28 (N.C. 1934).

172 S.E. 191 (State v. . Fowler and Brincefield) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Williams
220 S.E.2d 558 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1975)
State v. Hales
122 S.E.2d 768 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1961)
State v. . Powell
13 S.E.2d 232 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1941)
Reynolds v. . Reynolds.
181 S.E. 338 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1935)