State v. Kellum

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. Kellum

160 S.E.2d 76, 273 N.C. 348, 1968 N.C. LEXIS 600

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedMarch 20, 1968

Docket168

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 160 S.E.2d 76 (State v. Kellum) 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. Kellum, 160 S.E.2d 76, 273 N.C. 348, 1968 N.C. LEXIS 600 (N.C. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

G.S. 20-138 makes it unlawful for any person, whether licensed or not, who is under the influence of intoxicating liquor to drive any vehicle upon the highways within this State. The three elements of the offense are (1) driving a vehicle, (2) upon a highway within the State, (3). while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. State v. Haddock, 254 N.C. 162, 118 S.E. 2d 411.

. All the evidence points unerringly to the conclusion that defendant operated a vehicle along highway 17 in arriving at the Eubanks home. The only vehicular entrance to that home was the driveway connected with said highway. Mr- Eubanks saw the car enter his premises. In response to the horn he went to the rear of the house and observed defendant to be the driver and only occupant of the car. Defendant himself says he was so drunk he has no idea where hé was or how he got there. The circumstances revealed by the record are, as stated by Parker, J., now C.J., in State v. Lowther, 265 N.C. 315, 144 S.E. 2d 64, “consistent with the hypothesis that the accused is guilty, and at the same time are inconsistent with the hypothesis that he is innocent and with every other reasonable hypothesis except that of guilt.”

No other verdict could have been rendered on the evidence. Prejudicial error does not appear.

No error.

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

Per Curiam.

G.S. 20-138 makes it unlawful for any person, whether licensed or not, who is under the influence of intoxicating liquor to drive any vehicle upon the highways within this State. The three elements of the offense are (1) driving a vehicle, (2) upon a highway within the State, (3). while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. State v. Haddock, 254 N.C. 162, 118 S.E. 2d 411.

. All the evidence points unerringly to the conclusion that defendant operated a vehicle along highway 17 in arriving at the Eubanks home. The only vehicular entrance to that home was the driveway connected with said highway. Mr- Eubanks saw the car enter his premises. In response to the horn he went to the rear of the house and observed defendant to be the driver and only occupant of the car. Defendant himself says he was so drunk he has no idea where hé was or how he got there. The circumstances revealed by the record are, as stated by Parker, J., now C.J., in State v. Lowther, 265 N.C. 315, 144 S.E. 2d 64, “consistent with the hypothesis that the accused is guilty, and at the same time are inconsistent with the hypothesis that he is innocent and with every other reasonable hypothesis except that of guilt.”

No other verdict could have been rendered on the evidence. Prejudicial error does not appear.

No error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

160 S.E.2d 76, 273 N.C. 348, 1968 N.C. LEXIS 600, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-kellum-nc-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack