State v. Perry

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. Perry

84 S.E.2d 329, 241 N.C. 119, 1954 N.C. LEXIS 554

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedNovember 10, 1954

Docket435

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 84 S.E.2d 329 (State v. Perry) 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. Perry, 84 S.E.2d 329, 241 N.C. 119, 1954 N.C. LEXIS 554 (N.C. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Since the charge in the warrant “must be supported by the facts as they existed at the time it was formally laid in court, and cannot be supported by evidence of willful failure supervening between the time the charge was made and the time of the trial — at least when the trial is had — as it was here upon the original warrant,” S. v. Summerlin, 224 N.C. 178, 29 S.E. 2d 462, pertinent evidence in this respect offered upon trial of present ease in Superior Court being directed to occurrence after the warrant was issued is insufficient to support the charge, — and the motion of defendant for judgment of nonsuit must be allowed. However, the statute, as interpreted by this Court, creates a continuing offense, S. v. Johnson, 212 N.C. 566, 194 S.E. 319; S. v. Chambers, 238 N.C. 373, 78 S.E. 2d 209, and cases cited.

Hence the decision here will not preclude further prosecution in keeping with the existing factual situation.

Eeversed.

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

Per Curiam.

Since the charge in the warrant “must be supported by the facts as they existed at the time it was formally laid in court, and cannot be supported by evidence of willful failure supervening between the time the charge was made and the time of the trial — at least when the trial is had — as it was here upon the original warrant,” S. v. Summerlin, 224 N.C. 178, 29 S.E. 2d 462, pertinent evidence in this respect offered upon trial of present ease in Superior Court being directed to occurrence after the warrant was issued is insufficient to support the charge, — and the motion of defendant for judgment of nonsuit must be allowed. However, the statute, as interpreted by this Court, creates a continuing offense, S. v. Johnson, 212 N.C. 566, 194 S.E. 319; S. v. Chambers, 238 N.C. 373, 78 S.E. 2d 209, and cases cited.

Hence the decision here will not preclude further prosecution in keeping with the existing factual situation.

Eeversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 S.E.2d 329, 241 N.C. 119, 1954 N.C. LEXIS 554, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-perry-nc-1954.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack