State v. . Jones

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. . Jones

153 S.E. 259, 198 N.C. 704, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 456

DecidedMay 21, 1930

StatusPublished

This text of 153 S.E. 259 (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, 153 S.E. 259, 198 N.C. 704, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 456 (N.C. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Adams, J.

Four defendants were indicted for tbe murder of Claude Gentry. Sam Jones and W. C. Jones were discharged when tbe action as to tbem was dismissed, Ed Swan was acquitted, and Jobn Jones was convicted of manslaughter. From tbe judgment pronounced tbe latter appealed.'

There are only two assignments of error. F. G. Hembry testified without objection that be was present when tbe fatal wound was inflicted and saw tbe defendant knock tbe deceased backward, get on top of him, and cut him with a knife in tbe stomach or side. A deaf mute afterwards testified that be saw tbe defendant take tbe arm of tbe deceased and “make like to cut him.” To tbe last statement tbe defendant excepted. This testimony corroborated 'Hembry and was itself substantive evidence; it was therefore properly admitted.

Dr. Mooneyhan was asked whether in bis presence tbe deceased said who cut him. Tbe proposed testimony was not res gestee, but tbe narrative of a transaction, and was not a dying declaration. It was hearsay.

Moreover, it does not appear what tbe answer would have been. There is

No error.

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

Adams, J.

Four defendants were indicted for tbe murder of Claude Gentry. Sam Jones and W. C. Jones were discharged when tbe action as to tbem was dismissed, Ed Swan was acquitted, and Jobn Jones was convicted of manslaughter. From tbe judgment pronounced tbe latter appealed.'

There are only two assignments of error. F. G. Hembry testified without objection that be was present when tbe fatal wound was inflicted and saw tbe defendant knock tbe deceased backward, get on top of him, and cut him with a knife in tbe stomach or side. A deaf mute afterwards testified that be saw tbe defendant take tbe arm of tbe deceased and “make like to cut him.” To tbe last statement tbe defendant excepted. This testimony corroborated 'Hembry and was itself substantive evidence; it was therefore properly admitted.

Dr. Mooneyhan was asked whether in bis presence tbe deceased said who cut him. Tbe proposed testimony was not res gestee, but tbe narrative of a transaction, and was not a dying declaration. It was hearsay.

Moreover, it does not appear what tbe answer would have been. There is

No error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

153 S.E. 259, 198 N.C. 704, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 456, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-jones-nc-1930.