State v. Whitfield

124 S.E.2d 869, 256 N.C. 704, 1962 N.C. LEXIS 526
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided April 11, 1962·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

At the conclusion of all the evidence, defendant stated to the court: “I don’t see how I can be guilty when Mr. Pender-grass helped load the pony on the truck.” Mindful that defendant was not represented by counsel, the Attorney General concedes, and we think properly so, that defendant’s said statement should be treated as a demurrer to the evidence and motion for judgment as in case of nonsuit. Moreover, the Attorney General concedes, and we agree, that the evidence, when considered in the light most favorable to the State, was insufficient to support a finding that, when defendant obtained possession of the pony from Pendergrass, this constituted a taking of the pony by defendant with felonious intent. Hence, the judgment of the court below is reversed.

Reversed.

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

State v. Whitfield, 124 S.E.2d 869, 256 N.C. 704, 1962 N.C. LEXIS 526 (N.C. 1962).

124 S.E.2d 869 (State v. Whitfield) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Hill
255 S.E.2d 757 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1979)