State v. . Rhyne
This text of 147 S.E. 742 (State v. . Rhyne) 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.
Opinion
The evidence tended to show that the defendant and another drove a truck into the woods about seventy-five or one hundred yards from the public road, got out and walked back into the woods. When they returned the defendant Rhyne had a half-gallon jar of whiskey under each arm. The officers were lying in wait at the truck and the defendant broke the jars and escaped. These events took place about nine o’clock at night. The trial judge permitted an officer to *147 testify that early next morning he went back into the woods “in the same spot where they went” and found three five-gallon cans which were empty.
The defendant objected-to this testimony and assigns the admission thereof as error.
There was ample evidence to support the conviction, irrespective of the evidence objected to. However, the finding of the empty cans at the identical spot where the defendant went the night before was a competent circumstance.
No error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
147 S.E. 742, 197 N.C. 146, 1929 N.C. LEXIS 172, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-rhyne-nc-1929.