State v. Carpenter
Decision Date | 14 December 1949 |
Docket Number | No. 580.,580. |
Citation | 56 S.E.2d 713,231 N.C. 229 |
Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Parties | STATE. v. CARPENTER. |
N. L. Carpenter was convicted in the Superior Court of Richmond County, Susie Sharpe, Special Judge, of assault inflicting serious injury, and he appealed.
The Supreme Court, Seawell, J, held that the evidence justified submission of case to jury, but that trial court erred in giving instruction to return a verdict of not guilty only in event jury did not believe the evidence of defendant beyond a reasonable doubt, and ordered a new trial.
The defendant-appellant was tried in the Special County Court of Richmond County on a warrant charging him as follows:
He was convicted in that court and appealed to the Superior Court of Richmond County. When the case was called in the Superior Court and before the jury was impanelled, or entry of a plea, the defendant moved to quash the warrant and dismiss the case (a) because he had been tried in the lower court and found guilty of "cruel and unusual punishment, " and there was no such crime; and (b) that the lower court did not have jurisdiction and since the jurisdiction of the Superior Court was derivative, the case should be dismissed.
The court denied this motion and defendant excepted. Thereupon the Solicitor moved to strike out the words "cruel and unusual punishment upon him, " and insert in lieu thereof, "serious and painful injuries upon the person of Clarence Lett, " so that the warrant should read, after the amendment, "did unlawfully, willfully, and feloniously assault and hang Clarence Lett by hisarms on the wall for seventy (70) hours in the N. C. Prison Camp No. 607 and did inflict serious and painful injuries upon the person of Clarence Lett." Defendant objected to the amendment as changing the nature of the crime. The amendment was allowed and defendant excepted.
Clarence Lett, the prisoner upon whom the assault was alleged to have been made, testified in substance as follows:
The witness was in August, 1948, and several months previously, serving time as a prisoner in the prison camp in Richmond, a term of 18 months for a misdemeanor. Carpenter was Superintendent of the prison camp at the time he was there. Some time in August, 1948, a punishment was administered to the witness by Mr. Carpenter. The witness and other prisoners were working on the highway and ditching along the road and a beer truck came along, and the witness said, "I would like to have me a case of beer, " and one of the prisoners said, "Budweiser is what you need--makes you wiser, "--
Some time in the first of the spring Carpenter came through the mess hall of the prison camp and stated that he was making new rules and that if prisoners were caught talking on the road they were going to be hung up and punished for it. The conversation happened after he had been told that. They were carried into camp after the beer truck passed by.
The witness saw Mr. Carpenter the afternoon on which they were brought in. He came in there after Capt. Meeks had already hung the witness and others up and talked to another prisoner and hung him up. It was all for the same thing.
By being "hung up" the witness stated that "you had to stand with your hands out before you, when they were handcuffed to the bar." Standing, the hands were about even with the chest. -- (about a thickness of a few inches)--
Carl Holland, a witness for the State, testified that he was Sheriff of Richmond County and that he had investigated the alleged assault at the Richmond County prison camp. He had a conversation with Carpenter with respect to Lett, --the punishment administered to him. Carpenter carried him out into the cells and showed him how the punishment was administered. While talking about the indictments which had been brought against Meeks and Carpenter, Carpenter stated that Meeks had nothing to do with it; that Meeks administered the punishment under his direction.
This witness stated that he exhibited to him the prisoner at that time handcuffed to the bars; that he was in a crouched position, partially on his legs and knees.
Carpenter said that the punishment was not administered in the presence of a doctor; that he did not have a doctor unless he thought it was necessary. The floor was a cement floor.
At the close of the State's evidence the defendant demurred thereto and moved for judgment as of nonsuit, which was denied, and defendant excepted.
The defendant offered in evidence an authenticated copy of the "Rules and Regulations Governing the Management of Prisoners under the Control of the State Highway and Public Works Commission, " and these were received as evidence and identified as defendant's Exhibit A. Excerpts therefrom are quoted infra.
The defendant Carpenter testified that he was at the time mentioned employed by the State Highway & Public Works Commission, and was now so employed, in the capacity of superintendent and manager of prisoners in the Richmond County prison camp. That he was responsible for the conduct and keep of the prisoners at the camp and employed the prison guards; and had the responsibility for disciplining of prisoners. He testified that on August 11, 1948, he had occasion to impose disciplinary punishment on Clarence Lett; that Clarence Lett was assigned to the road gang working on the highway under the supervision of guards and State maintenance foremen. The prisoner Lett was sent to the camp by the guard; he was sent in at 20 minutes to 4:00 o'clock on Wednesday, August 12. As a result of the report from the guard, the witness gave orders to his steward to handcuff Lett to the bars. Witness introduced the report that he had made with reference to the incident, which report was entitled, "Grade Demotion and Punishment Report, " and shows that the punishment was for "unsatisfactory work and disorderly conduct on the roads, " and contained the punishment recommended with grade demotion. Witness' recommendation was "48 to 60 hours and demote to C. Grade." Below the report there was a printed form for grade demotion and the statement,
The witness stated that he was not present when Lett was handcuffed and did not see him; did not touch him; did not release him at any time but gave instructions to release him periodically. The witness further testified that he had given instructions to the night guards Arnett and Miles to release the prisoner every five hours for 15 minutes. The witness stated...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Fenner
...with which defendant was originally charged. G.S. § 7-149, Rule 12; State v. Thompson, 233 N.C. 345, 64 S.E.2d 157; State v. Carpenter, 231 N.C. 229, 56 S.E.2d 713; State v. Brown, 225 N.C. 22, 33 S.E.2d 121. Defendant contends that this general rule does not apply here for the reason that ......
-
State v. Moore
...152 N.C. 793, 67 S.E. 480; State v. Johnson, 188 N.C. 591, 125 S.E. 183; State v. Wilson, 221 N. C. 365, 20 S.E.2d 273; State v. Carpenter, 231 N.C. 229, 56 S.E.2d 713; State v. Wilson, 237 N.C. 746, 75 S.E.2d 924; State v. McHone, 243 N.C. 231, 90 S.E.2d 536. The case is distinguishable fr......
-
State v. Broome, 172
...The trial judge in the Superior Court had discretionary power to permit the amendment to the warrant as set forth above. State v. Carpenter, 231 N.C. 229, 56 S.E.2d 713; State v. Grimes, 226 N.C. 523, 39 S.E.2d 394; State v. Lewis, 177 N.C. 555, 98 S.E. 309; 2 Strong's N.C. Index, Indictmen......
-
State v. Thompson
...the Superior Court to allow amendments to warrants is very comprehensive. State v. Stone, 231 N.C. 324, 56 S.E.2d 675; State v. Carpenter, 231 N.C. 229, 56 S.E.2d 713; State v. Bowser, 230 N.C. 330, 53 S.E.2d 282; State v. Wilson, 227 N.C. 43, 40 S.E.2d 449; State v. Brown, 225 N.C. 22, 33 ......