State v. . Presnell

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. . Presnell

36 S.E.2d 927, 226 N.C. 160, 1946 N.C. LEXIS 401

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedFebruary 27, 1946

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 36 S.E.2d 927 (State v. . Presnell) 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. . Presnell, 36 S.E.2d 927, 226 N.C. 160, 1946 N.C. LEXIS 401 (N.C. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

The defendant, a citizen and resident of Caldwell County, was indicted in Buncombe County for selling butter in said county, which the warrant charged weighed less than represented, in violation of G.S., 81-17. The *Page 161 defendant interposed a plea in abatement on the ground that if the statute had been violated the offense occurred in Caldwell and not in Buncombe County. The plea was denied. Defendant appeals, assigning error. This appeal was due to be heard at the call of the Nineteenth District, on 4 September, 1945. Rule 5 of the Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court,221 N.C. 546. Counsel cannot waive this rule. The rules of this Court are mandatory, and not directory. S. v. Moore, 210 N.C. 459, 187 S.E. 586.

The rules of practice governing the time for docketing appeals in the Supreme Court, or for applying for a writ of certiorari, where the case on appeal, for some cogent reason cannot be docketed within the time prescribed by the rules, has been uniformly enforced since the decision inS. v. Farmer, 188 N.C. 243, 124 S.E. 562. See also Pruitt v. Wood,199 N.C. 788, 156 S.E. 126.

Appeal dismissed.

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

The defendant, a citizen and resident of Caldwell County, was indicted in Buncombe County for selling butter in said county, which the warrant charged weighed less than represented, in violation of G.S., 81-17. The *Page 161 defendant interposed a plea in abatement on the ground that if the statute had been violated the offense occurred in Caldwell and not in Buncombe County. The plea was denied. Defendant appeals, assigning error. This appeal was due to be heard at the call of the Nineteenth District, on 4 September, 1945. Rule 5 of the Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court,221 N.C. 546. Counsel cannot waive this rule. The rules of this Court are mandatory, and not directory. S. v. Moore, 210 N.C. 459, 187 S.E. 586.

The rules of practice governing the time for docketing appeals in the Supreme Court, or for applying for a writ of certiorari, where the case on appeal, for some cogent reason cannot be docketed within the time prescribed by the rules, has been uniformly enforced since the decision inS. v. Farmer, 188 N.C. 243, 124 S.E. 562. See also Pruitt v. Wood,199 N.C. 788, 156 S.E. 126.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 S.E.2d 927, 226 N.C. 160, 1946 N.C. LEXIS 401, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-presnell-nc-1946.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack