State v. . Long

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. . Long

76 N.C. 254

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedJanuary 5, 1877

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 76 N.C. 254 (State v. . Long) 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. . Long, 76 N.C. 254 (N.C. 1877).

Pincite

Opinion

Eaircloth, J.

The defendant was indicted as an overseer of a public road for failing to keep it in repair and was. convicted. The ground of appeal is that his appointment was proved by parol and not by the Court record ' The-proof was that he had professed to be overseer for three or-four years, had summoned the road hands and worked the road repeatedly, in other words had acted as overseer in all respects except that he failed to keep it in good order at all. times.”

It would be better to produce the record in such cases, but we think the defendant has concluded himself by his-own acts.

lie took the benefit of his office by not working as a hand,, and its other emoluments if any there be.

We have held that a Justice of the Peace who assumed, •the duties of the office and received the fees belonging; thereto, although he had not taken the oath of office, was - indictable for misbehavior in office. State v. Cansler, 75 N. C. 442. And on the same principle we hold that the defendant is liable in the present case.

There is error. Let this be certified to the end that the? Court below may proceed according to law.

Per Curiam. Judgment reversed-

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

Eaircloth, J.

The defendant was indicted as an overseer of a public road for failing to keep it in repair and was. convicted. The ground of appeal is that his appointment was proved by parol and not by the Court record ' The-proof was that he had professed to be overseer for three or-four years, had summoned the road hands and worked the road repeatedly, in other words had acted as overseer in all respects except that he failed to keep it in good order at all. times.”

It would be better to produce the record in such cases, but we think the defendant has concluded himself by his-own acts.

lie took the benefit of his office by not working as a hand,, and its other emoluments if any there be.

We have held that a Justice of the Peace who assumed, •the duties of the office and received the fees belonging; thereto, although he had not taken the oath of office, was - indictable for misbehavior in office. State v. Cansler, 75 N. C. 442. And on the same principle we hold that the defendant is liable in the present case.

There is error. Let this be certified to the end that the? Court below may proceed according to law.

Per Curiam. Judgment reversed-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

76 N.C. 254, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-long-nc-1877.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack