State v. . Jones

80 N.C. 415
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJanuary 5, 1879
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 80 N.C. 415 (State v. . Jones) 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. . Jones, 80 N.C. 415 (N.C. 1879).

Opinion

Ashe, J.

The first exception taken was to the ruling of His Honor in allowing a juror to be challenged by the state after he had been passed to the prisoner, and while he was under examination by the prisoner upon his voir dire as to the cause of challenge. We are of opinion there was no error in this ruling. The juror stated that he had formed and expressed the opinion that the prisoner was not guilty. He was therefore not an impartial juror, and without a challenge by the state, it was the right and duty of the court to stand aside such juror at any time before the jury were im-pannelled and charged with the prisoner. State v. Boon, post —, and authorities there cited ; State v. Adair, 66 N. C., 298 : State v. Ward, 39 Ves. 225.

2. His Honor refused to admit testimony that one Freeman about eleven o’clock on the night the murder was committed got a pistol from one Gordon, saying deceased had shivered his arm and he was going to hunt him up, and that Freeman absented himself thereafter and did not return until after prisoner was convicted of the murder. The admission of this testimony was' properly refused. It was *417 but hearsay and did not tend to disprove the guilt of the prisoner. State v. Duncan, 6 Ire., 236; State v. May, 4 Dev., 328.

3. The prisoner moved in arrest of judgment because in one of the counts of the indictment it is charged that the deceased died on the 26th of December, 1878, instead of 1877. This defect is expressly cured by the act of 1811. Bat. Rev., ch. 33, § 66. There is no error. Let this be certified to the-court below that further proceedings may be had agreeably to this decision and the laws of the state.

Pee, Cueiam. No error-

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

Related

State v. Harris
194 S.E.2d 796 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1973)
State v. Atkinson
167 S.E.2d 241 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1969)
State v. . Hicks
102 S.E. 388 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1920)
Carter v. . King
94 S.E. 4 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1917)
State v. . Lane
81 S.E. 620 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1914)
S. v. . Vann
77 S.E. 295 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1913)
State v. Vann
162 N.C. 534 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1913)
State v. . R. R.
62 S.E. 1088 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1908)
State v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co.
149 N.C. 508 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1908)
State v. . Burton
50 S.E. 214 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1905)
State v. Vick.
43 S.E. 626 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1903)
State v. . Fuller
19 S.E. 797 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1894)
State v. . Green
95 N.C. 611 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1886)
State v. . Lambert
93 N.C. 618 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1885)
State v. . Gee
92 N.C. 756 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1885)
State v. Mann
83 Mo. 589 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1884)
State v. . Vestal
82 N.C. 563 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1880)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
80 N.C. 415, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-jones-nc-1879.