State v. . Reynolds

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. . Reynolds

21 S.E.2d 813, 222 N.C. 40, 1942 N.C. LEXIS 15

DecidedSeptember 23, 1942

StatusPublished

This text of 21 S.E.2d 813 (State v. . Reynolds) 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. . Reynolds, 21 S.E.2d 813, 222 N.C. 40, 1942 N.C. LEXIS 15 (N.C. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

DeviN, J.

Tbe defendant was charged with burglariously breaking and entering a room in a building used and occupied at tbe time by tbe State’s witness as a sleeping apartment. It was charged that tbe breaking and entering were with intent to commit a robbery, and that tbe State’s witness was robbed of a sum of money.

The solicitor announced that be would not ask for a verdict of guilty of burglary in tbe first degree. Tbe jury returned verdict of guilty, and from judgment imposing prison sentence tbe defendant appealed.

The defendant assigns as error tbe denial by tbe court below of bis motion for judgment as of nonsuit. An examination of tbe record before us leads to tbe conclusion that this motion was properly denied. Tbe State’s witness testified on tbe trial to tbe fact of tbe felonious breaking and entry, and identified the defendant as the perpetrator. While tbe force of this testimony was somewhat weakened by evidence tending to show contradictory statements made by tbe witness, tbe weight of tbe testimony and its probative value were matters for tbe jury.

Tbe exceptions noted to tbe rulings of tbe court in tbe admission of testimony for tbe purpose of corroboration cannot be sustained.

In tbe trial we find

No error.

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

DeviN, J.

Tbe defendant was charged with burglariously breaking and entering a room in a building used and occupied at tbe time by tbe State’s witness as a sleeping apartment. It was charged that tbe breaking and entering were with intent to commit a robbery, and that tbe State’s witness was robbed of a sum of money.

The solicitor announced that be would not ask for a verdict of guilty of burglary in tbe first degree. Tbe jury returned verdict of guilty, and from judgment imposing prison sentence tbe defendant appealed.

The defendant assigns as error tbe denial by tbe court below of bis motion for judgment as of nonsuit. An examination of tbe record before us leads to tbe conclusion that this motion was properly denied. Tbe State’s witness testified on tbe trial to tbe fact of tbe felonious breaking and entry, and identified the defendant as the perpetrator. While tbe force of this testimony was somewhat weakened by evidence tending to show contradictory statements made by tbe witness, tbe weight of tbe testimony and its probative value were matters for tbe jury.

Tbe exceptions noted to tbe rulings of tbe court in tbe admission of testimony for tbe purpose of corroboration cannot be sustained.

In tbe trial we find

No error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 S.E.2d 813, 222 N.C. 40, 1942 N.C. LEXIS 15, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-reynolds-nc-1942.