State v. Daniels
| Decision Date | 24 May 1950 |
| Docket Number | No. 290,290 |
| Citation | 232 N.C. 196,59 S.E.2d 430 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE, v. DANIELS et al. |
Herman L. Taylor, Raleigh, for defendants, petitioners.
Harry McMullan, Attorney General, Ralph Moody, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.
The petitioners, Bennie Daniels and Lloyd Ray Daniels, were tried at May Term, 1949 of Pitt County Superior Court on an indictment charging them with the murder of William Benjamin O'Neal, and were convicted of murder in the first degree, without recommendation of mercy, and were sentenced to death. From this judgment they gave notice of appeal to the Supreme Court of North Carolina, and an order was made permitting them to appeal in forma pauperis. Not having perfected that appeal by serving case on appeal within the time allowed, they petitioned this Court for a writ of certiorari to bring up the case on appeal, which writ was denied for want of merit. State v. Daniels, 231 N.C. 17, 56 S.E.2d 2.
They then filed in this Court a petition for permission to file in the court of trial, towit, the Superior Court of Pitt County, a writ of error coram nobis. This petition was denied for want of substantial merit, and because it failed to bring the application within the purview of such a writ. State v. Daniels, 231 N.C. 341, 56 S.E. 2d 646.
On motion of the Attorney General the appeal of defendants was dismissed by this Court in decision filed March 1, 1950. State v. Daniels, 231 N.C. 509, 57 S.E.2d 653.
The present petitioners thereupon filed in the Supreme Court of the United States a petition for certiorari to have the matter reviewed in that Court, and proceedings here were stayed by order of Chief Justice Stacy, pending action upon said petition.
On May 8, 1950, the Supreme Court of the United States, 70 S.Ct. 837, denied the petition without opinion, and this denial has been duly certified to this Court.
The petitioners now again petition this Court for leave to file a petition in the Superior Court of Pitt County for a writ of error coram nobis; and incorporate in that petition substantially matters that were presented to the Supreme Court of the United States in their petition to that Court for Certiorari. On the face of the petition it appears that these are matters fully presented to the Court upon their trial and there passed upon.
The function and limitations of the writ of error coram nobis were called to the attention of counsel for the petitioners when the petition for certiorari to bring up the case on appeal was dismissed in this Court. State v. Daniels, 231 N.C. 17, 56 S.E.2d 2, supra; and again in the subsequent decision dismissing the petition for leave to file a petition for such writ in the trial court.
The writ of error coram nobis obtains in this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brown v. Allen Speller v. Allen Daniels v. Allen
... 344 U.S. 443 . 73 S.Ct. 397 . 97 L.Ed. 469 . BROWN . v. . ALLEN, Warden, Central Prison of State" of North Carolina. SPELLER v. ALLEN, Warden, Central Prison of State of North Carolina. DANIELS et al. v. ALLEN, Warden, Central Prison of State of North Carolina. . Nos. 32, 22, 20. . Reargued Oct. 13, 1952. . Decided Feb. 9, 1953. . Rehearing Denied April 27, 1953. . \xC2"......
-
Daniels v. Allen, 6330.
...all matters which might be pleaded in that Court in the premises, and upon which the petitioners may now rely." State v. Daniels, 232 N.C. 196, 59 S.E.2d 430, 431-432. No application for certiorari was made to the Supreme Court of the United States to review this On these facts we think tha......
-
Cutbirth v. State
...philosophic bankruptcy of client-right waiver by attorney inadvertence, neglect, or ignorance. 5 The first cases were State v. Daniels, 232 N.C. 196, 59 S.E.2d 430 (1950); Daniels v. Crawford, E.D.N.C., 99 F.Supp. 208 (1951); Daniels v. Allen, 192 F.2d 763 (4th Cir.1951); and finally, in on......
-
State v. Green, 22
...defendant was tried is given only when the matter on which the petition is based is 'extraneous to the record. " State v. Daniels, 232 N.C. 196, 59 S.E.2d 430 (1950). Defendant has neither sought nor obtained permission of this Court to apply for the writ. Moreover, his unauthorized applica......