State v. Jacobs

176 S.E.2d 833, 9 N.C. App. 597, 1970 N.C. App. LEXIS 1416
Court of Appeals of North Carolina·Decided October 21, 1970·No. No. 7016SC530·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

VAUGHN, Judge.

The sole question presented on this appeal is properly stated by the appellant as follows:

“Whether the trial court erred when it allowed defendant’s motion to quash the warrant on the grounds that the name of the defendant did not appear in the complaint for arrest or in the warrant for arrest, but appeared only in the caption or title?”

We hold that appellant’s question should be answered in the affirmative. The complaint and the warrant are on a single page. The complaint refers to the title of the action. The warrant refers to the complaint. The complaint is, by reference, incorporated into the warrant. “When the title, the complaint and the warrant are considered together as parts of the same instrument and proceeding, they point out the defendant with due certainty as the person committing the offenses alleged. S. v. Poythress, 174 N.C. 809, 93 S.E. 919.” State v. Sawyer, 233 N.C. 76, 62 S.E. 2d 515.

Reversed.

Judges Campbell and Britt concur.

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

State v. Jacobs, 176 S.E.2d 833, 9 N.C. App. 597, 1970 N.C. App. LEXIS 1416 (N.C. Ct. App. 1970).

176 S.E.2d 833 (State v. Jacobs) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jackson National Life Insurance v. Snead
499 S.E.2d 173 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1998)
State v. Teasley
176 S.E.2d 838 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1970)