State v. Collins

• Decision Date: 31 October 1885
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE v. JAMES COLLINS.

93 N.C. 564

STATE

v.JAMES COLLINS.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October Term, 1885.

Indictment for LARCENY, tried before Meares, Judge, and a jury, at September Term, 1885, of the Criminal Court of NEW HANOVER county.

The defendants were charged with the larceny of some hams, the property of John L. Boatwright, and on the trial, after some testimony had been offered tending to establish the larceny, the defendant Julius Jones was placed on the stand by the Solicitor, and was cautioned as to his legal rights, and informed with great particularity by the Court, that he was not bound to give any testimony that would criminate himself.

He then testified that the defendant James Collins gave the hams to him, at the store of J. L. Boatwright, and told him that he, (Collins,) would pay him if he would sell them for him, and furthermore, that he did not know what the bag which he received from the said Collins contained, until it was opened at the cookshop.

During the examination of one Southall, a witness for the State, the Solicitor offered in evidence the declaration of the defendant Julius Jones, made after his arrest, to the witness, voluntarily and without any inducement whatever, viz., “that he (the defendant Jones) had received the hams in question from the defendant Collins to sell for him.”

The Solicitor argued that a conspiracy had been established by the testimony, and that the declaration of a co-conspirator was admissible. The counsel for the defendants contended that no conspiracy had been established, and objected to the admission of the testimony.

The Court admitted the declaration in evidence, and the counsel for the defendants excepted.

Also during the examination of John L. Boatwright, a State's witness, the Solicitor called for the same declaration, viz., “that the defendant Jones had told him several times since his arrest, voluntarily and without any inducement, that the defendant Collins had given him the hams, and that he (Jones) was to sell them.” The Solicitor again insisting there had been proof of a conspiracy, which was denied by the defendant's counsel. The Court admitted the evidence, and the defendant's counsel excepted.

After the examination of the witnesses had closed, and after one of the counsel for James Collins had finished addressing the jury, and when the Solicitor was partly through his remarks to the jury, but before the last speech of the defendant's counsel, who had the closing speech, was made, the Court, without any suggestion from counsel, came to the conclusion that the declaration of the defendant Julius Jones, made to the witnesses Southall and Boatwright, was inadmissible, for a reason that had not been urged by either of the counsel in the case, and had not occurred to the Court at the time of the admission of the testimony, viz., that the declaration was made after the transaction, and was, therefore, “not in furtherance of a common design,” and was inadmissible, and the Court then declared to the counsel in the case, in the full hearing of the jury, that the...