State v. . Starling

51 N.C. 366
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided June 5, 1859·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

PeaesojST, O. J.

Every one is presumed to he of sound mind until the contrary is proven ; Pest on Presumptions, 57 and 170. This rule is necessary for the due administration of the law, as well in the criminal as on the civil side of the docket, and there is no reason for relaxing it.

Ilis Honor made the application of the doctrine as to “ a reasonable doubt” to the question involved in the case, correctly, with much clearness and force of statement. We will not enter into a discussion, because the matter is settled, and there is no consideration for treating it in any aspect as an open question; State v. Johnson, 3 Jones’ Rep. 266; State v. Craton, 6 Ire. Rep. 164. There is no error. This opinion must be certified to the Superior Court, to the end, that further proceedings may be had according to law.

Per Curiam, Judgment affirmed.

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

State v. . Starling, 51 N.C. 366 (N.C. 1859).

51 N.C. 366 (State v. . Starling) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. . Swink
47 S.E.2d 852 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1948)
State v. . Godwin
42 S.E.2d 617 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1947)
State v. . Jones
133 S.E. 81 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1926)
Hunt v. . Eure
127 S.E. 593 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1925)
Speas v. Merchants Bank & Trust Co.
125 S.E. 398 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1924)
State v. Falkner
182 N.C. 793 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1921)
State v. . Terry
92 S.E. 154 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1917)
State v. . Hancock
66 S.E. 137 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1909)