State v. Moore
This text of 78 S.E.2d 914 (State v. Moore) 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.
Opinion
The Attorney-General correctly concedes that the court erred in denying the motion in arrest of judgment.
Under G.S. 49-2, the neglect or the refusal of a parent to support his illegitimate child is not a crime unless it is willful. As a consequence, the State must both allege and prove a willful nonsupport in a prosecution under the statute. S. v. McDay, 232 N.C. 388, 61 S.E. 2d 86; S. v. Morgan, 226 N.C. 414, 38 S.E. 2d 166; S. v. Hayden, 224 N.C. 779, 32 S.E. 2d 333; S. v. Allen, 224 N.C. 530, 31 S.E. 2d 530. The criminal complaint underlying the warrant in the instant case does not charge the [744]*744defendant with the essential element of willfulness. This omission renders the warrant fatally defective, and necessitates an arrest of the judgment. S. v. Morgan, supra; S. v. Vanderlip, 225 N.C. 610, 35 S.E. 2d 885; S. v. Moore, 220 N.C. 535, 17 S.E. 2d 660; S. v. Clarke, 220 N.C. 392, 17 S.E. 2d 468; S. v. McLamb, 214 N.C. 322, 199 S.E. 81; S. v. Tarlton, 208 N.C. 734, 182 S.E. 481.
Judgment arrested.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
78 S.E.2d 914, 238 N.C. 743, 1953 N.C. LEXIS 617, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-moore-nc-1953.