State v. Lamm
Decision Date | 27 September 1950 |
Docket Number | No. 74,74 |
Citation | 61 S.E.2d 188,232 N.C. 402 |
Parties | STATE, v. LAMM. |
Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
R. F. Mintz, Wilson, for defendant-appellant.
Attorney General, Harry McMullan, Assistant Attorney General, T. W. Bruton, for the state.
The Attorney General for the State moves in this Court to dismiss the appeal for the reason that defendant's brief does not comply with Rule 28 of the Rules of Practice in the Supreme Court, 221 N.C. 544. As to this, we are of opinion that the brief is adequate to present the points principally relied upon by defendant as error in the trial court. Hence the motion is not allowed. And, as the life of defendant is at stake in this case, we have given due consideration to each assignment of error shown in the record, and error is not made to appear.
Defendant earnestly contends that there is error in the refusal of the court to allow his motion for judgment as of nonsuit on the first degree murder charge in compliance with the statute, G.S. § 15-173. The motion challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to show premeditation and deliberation beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Bittings, 206 N.C. 798, 175 S.E. 299, and cases cited. See also State v. Bowser, 214 N.C. 249, 199 S.E. 31; State v. Hawkins, 214 N.C. 326, 199 S.E. 284.
It is appropriate, therefore, to recur to the principles of law applicable to the case. Murder in the first degree is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice and with premeditation and deliberation. G.S. § 14-17. State v. Hawkins, supra; State v. Chavis, 231 N.C. 307, 56 S.E.2d 678.
The intentional killing of a human being with a deadly weapon implies malice and, if nothing else appears, constitutes murder in the second degree. State v. Payne, 213 N.C. 719, 197 S.E. 573; State v. Chavis, supra.
State v. Miller, 197 N.C. 445, 149 S.E. 590 592; State v. Payne, supra; State v. Hawkins, supra; State v. Chavis, supra.
'Premeditation means 'thought of beforehand' for some length of time, however short.' State v. Dowden, 118 N.C. 1145, 24 S.E. 722; State v. Benson, 183 N.C. 795, 111 S.E. 869, 871; State v. Hawkins, supra; State v. Chavis, supra.
In the Dowden case, 118 N.C. 1145, 24 S.E. 722, 723, supra, Avery, J., writing for the Court on the subject of premeditation had this to say:
And it has been said that State v. Benson, supra [183 N.C. 795, 111 S.E. 871]; State v. Steele, 190 N.C. 506, 130 S.E. 308; State v. Hawkins, supra; State v. Chavis, supra, and cases cited.
And, 'in determining the question of premeditation and deliberation, it is proper for the jury to take into consideration the conduct of [defendant], before and after, as well as at the time of, the homicide, and all the attending circumstances.' Stacy, C. J., in State v. Evans, 198 N.C. 82, 150 S.E. 678, 679; State v. Hawkins, supra, and cases cited.
Applying these principles to the case in hand, the evidence is abundantly sufficient to be submitted to the jury on the first degree murder charge, and to support the verdict of guilty of murder in the first degree as found by the jury.
Defendant also assigns as error portions of the charge in respect of the law applicable to his plea of insanity. The test of responsibility of a person charged with a criminal offense in...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Sanders
...the jury and be considered by it on the issue of murder in the first degree. State v. Perry, supra; State v. Faust, supra; State v. Lamm, 232 N.C. 402, 61 S.E.2d 188. Next the defendant contends the trial judge failed to properly state the evidence and array the contentions of the parties i......
-
State v. Sparks
...the first degree. State v. Van Landingham, supra; State v. Duncan, supra; State v. Perry, supra; State v. Faust, supra; State v. Lamm, 232 N.C. 402, 61 S.E.2d 188 (1950). Defendant next avers that the court committed reversible error by instructing the jury that if the State proves beyond a......
-
Smith v. State
...time," Bailey v. Commonwealth, 191 Va. 510, 62 S.E.2d 28, 31 (1950); "thought beforehand . . . however short," State v. Lamn, 232 N.C. 402, 406, 61 S.E.2d 188, 191 (1950); "no appreciable space of time between the intention . . . and the act . . . that may be as instantaneous as successive ......
-
State v. Wilkerson
...first degree is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice and with premeditation and deliberation. G.S. 14-17; State v. Lamm, 232 N.C. 402, 61 S.E.2d 188 (1950). Murder in the second degree is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice but without premeditation and deliberati......