State v. Byers
| Decision Date | 31 January 1879 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE v. MITCHELL BYERS. |
1878, of GUILFORD Superior Court, before Kerr, J.
In support of the charge alleged against the defendant, the prosecutrix testified among other things that upon one occasion she was forced to change the route she was going from one place to another by reason of the conduct of defendant, in that, he pursued her, made indecent propositions to her, and frightened her so greatly that she took refuge in a neighbor's house. The defendant set up an alibi, and his exception to the charge of the court which constitutes the basis of the decision here, is stated by Mr. Justice DILLARD in delivering the opinion. There was a verdict of guilty, judgment, appeal by defendant.
Attorney General, for the state .
Messrs. Scott & Caldwell and Batchelor, for defendant .
Upon the trial the defendant introduced a number of witnesses to prove an alibi, and in relation thereto His Honor charged the jury, “if in view of all the evidence in the cause they should believe and find that the defendant in alleging an alibi, was guilty of falsehood and misrepresentation as to his whereabouts, such falsehood might be considered by them as an additional evidence of guilt,” and upon this direction of the judge, an assignment of error is made.
The judge undertook to instruct the jury as to the law pertaining to the defence of alibi, and he should have told them what facts constituted the defence in law, and then explained the law to them arising on any and every phase of the facts under the evidence adduced, as they might find them to be. This should have been done, not only as a guide to the jury but as just on the issue between the state and the defendant. State v. Matthews, 78 N. C., 523. For example, after explaining the facts necessary to make out the alibi, the jury should have been directed if they found such necessary facts to exist, to acquit; and if the proof of such facts was not such as to satisfy them beyond a reasonable doubt of the alibi, then they needed to be and should have been instructed whether they could or could not consider the legal presumption of innocence, in aid; and how in that state of facts as a matter of law, the jury should be guided in making up their verdict.
His Honor in his instruction to the jury inadvertently omitted to submit the case to their consideration in view of these states of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Hunt
...actually given by the court were correct or erroneous. State v. Josey, 64 N.C. 56 (1870); State v. Jaynes, 78 N.C. 504 (1878); State v. Byers, 80 N.C. 426 (1879); State v. Reitz, 83 N.C. 634 (1880); State v. Starnes, 94 N.C. 973 (1886); State v. Freeman, 100 N.C. 429, 5 S.E. 921 (1888); Sta......
-
State v. Myers
...police officers may well have left the jury with the impression that he did not find defendant's statements to be credible. See State v. Byers, 80 N.C. 426 (1879). For these reasons, we are of the opinion that there was a reasonable possibility that a different result would have been reache......
-
State v. Bealin
...of alibi is properly given where such defense is presented and supported by evidence, ***." And in the North Carolina case of State v. Byers, 80 N.C. 426, it was held that the defendant's evidence tends to prove an alibi, a judgment of conviction must be reversed for failure to instruct the......
-
State v. Bealin, 15483.
...is properly given where such defense is presented and supported by evidence, * * *." And in the North Carolina case of State v. Byers, 80 N.C. 426, it was held that where the defendant's evidence tends to prove an alibi, a judgment of conviction must be reversed for failure to instruct ther......