State v. Parker

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. Parker

69 S.E.2d 542, 235 N.C. 302, 1952 N.C. LEXIS 382

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedMarch 19, 1952

Docket219

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 69 S.E.2d 542 (State v. Parker) 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. Parker, 69 S.E.2d 542, 235 N.C. 302, 1952 N.C. LEXIS 382 (N.C. 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

DeviN, C. J.

On defendant’s former appeal in this case (S. v. Parker, 234 N.C. 236, 66 S.E. 2d 907), his conviction on the charge of possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale was upheld by this Court and the case remanded to the Superior Court “to the end that proper judgment be entered in accordance with this opinion.” Judgment has now been rendered within the terms of the statute and in accordance with the decision of this Court. From this no appeal would lie.

Defendant, however, moved in arrest of judgment and interposed plea of former jeopardy, on the ground that subsequent to defendant’s conviction in the Superior Court he was acquitted in the Recorder’s Court of the charge of possession of intoxicating liquor. His motion was denied, and plea overruled, and properly so, we think, for the reasons set out in the opinion in the former appeal. S. v. Parker, supra; S. v. Lippard, 223 N.C. 167, 25 S.E. 2d 594. See also S. v. Bell, 205 N.C. 225, 171 S.E. 50.

*303 Defendant’s motion for new trial for newly discovered evidence was presented to tbe court below and was denied in tbe court’s discretion. Abuse of discretion is not suggested. No question is presented for our decision. S. v. Lea, 203 N.C. 316, 166 S.E. 292.

Tbe judgment imposing sentence is

Affirmed.

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

DeviN, C. J.

On defendant’s former appeal in this case (S. v. Parker, 234 N.C. 236, 66 S.E. 2d 907), his conviction on the charge of possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale was upheld by this Court and the case remanded to the Superior Court “to the end that proper judgment be entered in accordance with this opinion.” Judgment has now been rendered within the terms of the statute and in accordance with the decision of this Court. From this no appeal would lie.

Defendant, however, moved in arrest of judgment and interposed plea of former jeopardy, on the ground that subsequent to defendant’s conviction in the Superior Court he was acquitted in the Recorder’s Court of the charge of possession of intoxicating liquor. His motion was denied, and plea overruled, and properly so, we think, for the reasons set out in the opinion in the former appeal. S. v. Parker, supra; S. v. Lippard, 223 N.C. 167, 25 S.E. 2d 594. See also S. v. Bell, 205 N.C. 225, 171 S.E. 50.

*303 Defendant’s motion for new trial for newly discovered evidence was presented to tbe court below and was denied in tbe court’s discretion. Abuse of discretion is not suggested. No question is presented for our decision. S. v. Lea, 203 N.C. 316, 166 S.E. 292.

Tbe judgment imposing sentence is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

69 S.E.2d 542, 235 N.C. 302, 1952 N.C. LEXIS 382, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-parker-nc-1952.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack