State v. . Munroe

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. . Munroe

30 N.C. 258

DecidedJune 5, 1848

StatusPublished

This text of 30 N.C. 258 (State v. . Munroe) 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. . Munroe, 30 N.C. 258 (N.C. 1848).

Pincite

Opinion

Nash, J.

An appellate Court acts upon the transcript of the record from the Court, granting the appeal, and it is the duty of the Court to have before them a true copy, in order that justice may be done between the parties. Upon its being made to appear that the copy is not a true and full copy, the Court has the power, and it is its duty, to cause a perfect transcript to be filed. This is not denied, but it is said the power of the Court is exhausted by the first order. For this position no reason is or can be assigned. In truth the same reason exists for a second or third certiorari, as the first; the duty of the Court to have before them a full copy. The want of truth is the only suggestion that can authorise the Court to require another transcript. If that suggestion be made a second time, or oftener, and the Court sees reason to think the transcript defective, it may order other writs of certio-rari to issue. State v. Reid, 1st Dev. & Bat. 382. The Court, in this case, did see reason to believe that the second transcript was defective, and, in the legitimate exercise of its power, ordered a second certiorari to issue. In this we see no error.

Per Curiam, Ordered to be certified accordingly.

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

Nash, J.

An appellate Court acts upon the transcript of the record from the Court, granting the appeal, and it is the duty of the Court to have before them a true copy, in order that justice may be done between the parties. Upon its being made to appear that the copy is not a true and full copy, the Court has the power, and it is its duty, to cause a perfect transcript to be filed. This is not denied, but it is said the power of the Court is exhausted by the first order. For this position no reason is or can be assigned. In truth the same reason exists for a second or third certiorari, as the first; the duty of the Court to have before them a full copy. The want of truth is the only suggestion that can authorise the Court to require another transcript. If that suggestion be made a second time, or oftener, and the Court sees reason to think the transcript defective, it may order other writs of certio-rari to issue. State v. Reid, 1st Dev. & Bat. 382. The Court, in this case, did see reason to believe that the second transcript was defective, and, in the legitimate exercise of its power, ordered a second certiorari to issue. In this we see no error.

Per Curiam, Ordered to be certified accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 N.C. 258, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-munroe-nc-1848.