State v. Murrary

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Murrary

192 S.E.2d 688, 16 N.C. App. 638, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 1788

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedNovember 22, 1972

DocketNo. 7228SC738

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 192 S.E.2d 688 (State v. Murrary) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals 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. Murrary, 192 S.E.2d 688, 16 N.C. App. 638, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 1788 (N.C. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PARKER, Judge.

Defendant’s first assignment of error is directed to denial of his motion for nonsuit. There was ample evidence to require submission of the case to the jury and there is no merit in defendant’s first assignment of error.

Defendant’s second assignment of error is directed to denial of his motion in arrest of judgment. “A motion in arrest of judgment is one made after verdict and to prevent entry of judgment, and is based upon the insufficiency of the indictment or some other fatal defect appearing on the face of the record.” State v. McCollum, 216 N.C. 737, 6 S.E. 2d 503. The indictment in the present case is sufficient to charge the offense of armed robbery, and no defect appears on the face of the record before us. Accordingly, defendant’s second assignment of error is also without merit.

[640]*640We note that the indictment as well as the judgment and commitment refer to the defendant as “John Louis Murray,” while the caption of the case in the record on appeal names defendant as “John Lewis Murrary.” While defendant has made no point concerning this, in view of his motion in arrest of judgment we deem it proper to advert to this fact, and we hold that the doctrine of idem sonans is applicable. State v. Culbertson, 6 N.C. App. 327, 170 S.E. 2d 125.

We have carefully reviewed the entire record and find

No error.

Judges Campbell and Moréis concur.

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

PARKER, Judge.

Defendant’s first assignment of error is directed to denial of his motion for nonsuit. There was ample evidence to require submission of the case to the jury and there is no merit in defendant’s first assignment of error.

Defendant’s second assignment of error is directed to denial of his motion in arrest of judgment. “A motion in arrest of judgment is one made after verdict and to prevent entry of judgment, and is based upon the insufficiency of the indictment or some other fatal defect appearing on the face of the record.” State v. McCollum, 216 N.C. 737, 6 S.E. 2d 503. The indictment in the present case is sufficient to charge the offense of armed robbery, and no defect appears on the face of the record before us. Accordingly, defendant’s second assignment of error is also without merit.

[640]*640We note that the indictment as well as the judgment and commitment refer to the defendant as “John Louis Murray,” while the caption of the case in the record on appeal names defendant as “John Lewis Murrary.” While defendant has made no point concerning this, in view of his motion in arrest of judgment we deem it proper to advert to this fact, and we hold that the doctrine of idem sonans is applicable. State v. Culbertson, 6 N.C. App. 327, 170 S.E. 2d 125.

We have carefully reviewed the entire record and find

No error.

Judges Campbell and Moréis concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

192 S.E.2d 688, 16 N.C. App. 638, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 1788, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-murrary-ncctapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack