State v. . Yelverton

144 S.E. 534, 196 N.C. 64, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 279
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedSeptember 26, 1928
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 144 S.E. 534 (State v. . Yelverton) 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. . Yelverton, 144 S.E. 534, 196 N.C. 64, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 279 (N.C. 1928).

Opinion

Stacy, 0. J.,

after stating tbe case: It will be observed tbat tbe vital element of wilfulness, necessary to constitute an abandonment under tbe statute, is omitted from both instructions assigned as errors. Tbe language of tbe statute is as follows: “If any husband shall wilfully abandon bis wife without providing adequate support for such wife, and tbe children which be may have begotten upon her, be shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.” C. S., 4447.

Speaking to a similar situation and interpreting tbe statute in S. v. Johnson, 194 N. C., 378, 139 S. E., 697, it was said: “An offending husband may be convicted of abandonment and nonsupport when — and only when — two things are established: First, a wilful abandonment of tbe wife; and, second, a failure to provide ‘adequate support for such *66 wife, and the children which he may have begotten upon her.’ S. v. Toney, 162 N. C., 635; S. v. Hopkins, 130 N. C., 647. The abandonment must be wilful, that is, without just cause, excuse or justification. S. v. Smith, 164 N. C., 475. And both ingredients of the crime must be alleged and proved. S. v. May, 132 N. C., 1021.”

• It is conceded by the learned Assistant Attorney-General, Mr. Nash, that the instruction with respect to the alleged abandonment of the children .is erroneous; S. v. Bell, 184 N. C., 701, 115 S. E., 190.

New trial.

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

Related

David Thurston v. Kevin Frye
99 F.4th 665 (Fourth Circuit, 2024)
State v. Maxwell
267 S.E.2d 582 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1980)
State v. Gilbert
51 S.E.2d 887 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1949)
State v. . Carson
44 S.E.2d 721 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1947)
State v. . Dickens
1 S.E.2d 837 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1939)
State v. . Hinson
183 S.E. 397 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1936)
State v. . Cook
176 S.E. 757 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1934)
State v. . Roberts
150 S.E. 199 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1929)
State v. . Sneed
150 S.E. 197 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
144 S.E. 534, 196 N.C. 64, 1928 N.C. LEXIS 279, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-yelverton-nc-1928.