State v. . McAllister

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. . McAllister

188 S.E. 405, 210 N.C. 778, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 225

DecidedNovember 25, 1936

StatusPublished

This text of 188 S.E. 405 (State v. . McAllister) 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. . McAllister, 188 S.E. 405, 210 N.C. 778, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 225 (N.C. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The defendant was convicted upon a bill of indictment charging him with the larceny of a shotgun of the value of $50.00, the property of E. 0. Marshburn. All of the exceptive assignments of error present the same question, namely, was there sufficient evidence upon which to submit the case to the jury?

The evidence was to the effect that E. 0. Marshburn had a shotgun, for which he paid $68.00, in a room in the basement of his house known as the den; that on or about 5 June, 1936, the gun was taken from the den and never recovered; that the defendant, who slept on the premises of Marshburn, had a key to the den; that on said date the defendant took the gun out of the den and offered to sell it for $6.00 to a plumber who was working at the Marshburn house, stating that Mr. Marshburn had given him the gun; that when the defendant exhibited the gun to the plumber he brought it out of the den wrapped in a spread; and that Mr. Marshburn never gave the defendant the gun.

This evidence raises more than a suspicion of the guilt of the defendant, and was, therefore, sufficient to be submitted to the jury.

No error.

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

Per Curiam.

The defendant was convicted upon a bill of indictment charging him with the larceny of a shotgun of the value of $50.00, the property of E. 0. Marshburn. All of the exceptive assignments of error present the same question, namely, was there sufficient evidence upon which to submit the case to the jury?

The evidence was to the effect that E. 0. Marshburn had a shotgun, for which he paid $68.00, in a room in the basement of his house known as the den; that on or about 5 June, 1936, the gun was taken from the den and never recovered; that the defendant, who slept on the premises of Marshburn, had a key to the den; that on said date the defendant took the gun out of the den and offered to sell it for $6.00 to a plumber who was working at the Marshburn house, stating that Mr. Marshburn had given him the gun; that when the defendant exhibited the gun to the plumber he brought it out of the den wrapped in a spread; and that Mr. Marshburn never gave the defendant the gun.

This evidence raises more than a suspicion of the guilt of the defendant, and was, therefore, sufficient to be submitted to the jury.

No error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

188 S.E. 405, 210 N.C. 778, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 225, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-mcallister-nc-1936.