State v. Buchanan, 724.
| Decision Date | 16 June 1939 |
| Docket Number | No. 724.,724. |
| Citation | 3 S.E.2d 273,216 N.C. 34 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE . v. BUCHANAN. |
.
Appeal from Superior Court, Forsyth County; J. H. Clement, Judge.
Julius Buchanan was convicted of murder in the first degree, and he appeals.
New trial.
Criminal prosecution tried upon indictment charging the defendant with the murder of Gladys Buchanan, his wife.
Verdict: Guilty of murder in the first degree.
Judgment: Death by asphyxiation.
The defendant appeals, assigning errors.
John D. Slawter and Richmond Rucker, both of Winston-Salem, for appellant.
Harry McMullan, Atty. Gen., and T. W. Bruton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
The record discloses that on December 3, 1938, the defendant slew his wife under circumstances which the jury has found to be murder in the first degree. The story is one of domestic infelicity which began with slight bickerings, followed by more serious quarrels, and finally culminated in a fight with the deceased wielding a hammer and the defendant a hatchet. The result was fatal to the wife, and the husband's conduct is here the subject of investigation.
On the trial the defendant was asked by the solicitor if the money found by the officers when he was arrested came from the sale of liquor. He answered in the negative. The solicitor then inquired: Counsel for defendant objected, with the remark, "He did not say he was not engaged". Whereupon the court stated in the presence of the jury: "He swore both ways". To this the defendant noted an exception. The exception is well taken. State v. Rogers, 173 N.C. 755, 91 S. E. 854, L.R.A.1917E, 857. The effect of the observation was to disparage or to discredit the defendant's testimony in the eyes of the jury. State v. Bryant, 189 N.C. 112, 126 S.E. 107; Morris v. Kramer Bros. Co., 182 N.C. 87, 108 S.E. 381. The remark, which, of course, was an inadvertence, is just one of those slips, or casualties, which, now and then, befalls the most circumspect in the trial of causes on the circuit. State v. Stiwinter, 211 N.C. 278, 189 S.E. 868; State v. Kline, 190 N. C. 177, 129 S.E. 417.
Again, the following excerpt taken from the charge forms the basis of one of the defendant's exceptive assignments of error: "A person who has a good character is not as apt to commit the offense as a person of bad character, and a person of good character is more apt to tell the truth about the matter than a person of bad character."
It is not perceived wherein this instruction differs in principle from the one held for error in the recent case of State v. Alverson, 214 N.C. 685, 200 S.E. 410, 120 A.L.R. 1441. The ruling in Alverson's case is controlling here.
The jury may be disposed to accept the testimony of a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Simpson
...190 N.C. 177, 129 S.E. 417; State v. Griggs, 197 N.C. 352, 148 S.E. 547; State v. Stiwinter, 211 N.C. 278, 189 S.E. 868; State v. Buchanan, 216 N.C. 34, 3 S.E.2d 273; State v. Floyd, 220 N.C. 530, 17 S.E.2d 658; In re Will of Lomax, 225 N.C. 31, 33 S.E.2d 63. Even so, the question is presen......
-
McClamroch v. Colonial Ice Co.
...notably these. State v. Rogers, 173 N.C. 755, 91 S.E. 854, L.R.A.1917E, 857; State v. Bryant, 189 N.C. 112, 126 S.E. 107; State v. Buchanan, 216 N.C. 34, 3 S.E.2d 273, cases cited. Tested by these decisions, a reading of the report of the instant incident fails to convey the impression that......
-
State v. Mullis
...by testimony; and (2) it relates to a matter material to the issue. He recites and relies upon the decisions in State v. Buchanan, 216 N.C. 34, 3 S.E.2d 273, and State v. Wyont, 218 N.C. 505, 11 S.E.2d 473. The exceptions are without merit, and the authorities cited by the defendant are An ......
-
State v. McNeil
...230 N.C. 46, 51 S.E.2d 887; State v. Owenby, 226 N.C. 521, 39 S.E.2d 378; State v. Auston, 223 N.C. 203, 25 S.E.2d 613; State v. Buchanan, 216 N.C. 34, 3 S.E.2d 273; State v. Winckler, 210 N.C. 556, 187 S.E. 792; State v. Rhinehart, 209 N.C. 150, 183 S.E. 388; State v. Bryant, 189 N.C. 112,......