State v. Cook
| Decision Date | 12 October 1955 |
| Docket Number | No. 146,146 |
| Citation | 242 N.C. 700,89 S.E.2d 383 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE, v. Donald G. COOK. |
Childers & Johnston, Gastonia, for defendant-appellant.
Atty. Gen. Wm. B. Rodman, Jr., and Asst. Atty. Gen. Claude L. Love, for the State.
The offense described in the first part of G.S. § 14-54, contains the following essential elements: (1) an unlawful breaking or entering (2) of the dwelling house of another (3) with the intent to commit a felony or other infamous crime therein.
We concur in the State's contention to the effect that its evidence tends to show both an unlawful breaking or entry by trespass of the sleeping quarters of one or more nurses in the North Carolina Orthopedic Hospital. Even so, the only question for determination is whether or not the evidence adduced in the trial below was sufficient to carry the case to the jury on the question of an intent to commit the crime charged in the bill of indictment.
In order to convict a defendant under G.S. § 14-54, of a felony or other infamous crime, it is necessary to show that the breaking or entering the dwelling or other building described in the statute, was done 'with intent to commit a felony or other infamous crime therein '. State v. Spear, 164 N.C. 452, 79 S.E. 869; State v. Crisp, 188 N.C. 799, 125 S.E. 543; State v. Friddle, 223 N.C. 258, 25 S.E.2d 751. However, Chapter 1015 of the 1955 Session Laws of North Carolina, which became effective on the 17th day of May, 1955, amended G.S. § 14-54 by adding at the end thereof the following: "Where such breaking or entering shall be wrongfully done without intent to commit a felony or other infamous crime, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.' ' But, the provisions contained in this amendment are not applicable to this case since they were enacted after the conduct complained of occurred.
It is true that some of our cases are to the effect that where a defendant enters a dwelling in the nighttime, he having no right to be there, and flees when discovered, without making any explanation of his presence or of his intent, the jury may infer an intent to steal although no theft was actually committed. State v. McBryde, 97 N.C. 393, 1 S.E. 925; State v. Spear, supra; State v. Hargett, 196 N.C. 692, 146 S.E. 801; State v. Oakley, 210 N.C. 206, 186 S.E. 244.
In the instant case, however, the defendant did not flee when he was discovered, but upon inquiry as to what he wanted, he inquired about Joyce, a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Campbell
...offense. VACATED, in part; REVERSED, in part; and REMANDED.Judges STEPHENS and McCULLOUGH concur. 1.See, e.g., State v. Cook, 242 N.C. 700, 703, 89 S.E.2d 383, 385 (1955) (evidence sufficient to preclude inference where the defendant did not flee when discovered, explained that he was looki......
-
State v. Mays, No. COA07-78 (N.C. App. 11/6/2007)
...items from the home. We find the cases relied on by defendant to be distinguishable from the facts of this case. InState v. Cook, 242 N.C. 700, 703, 89 S.E.2d 383, 385 (1955), our Supreme Court found no evidence of intent where the defendant: (1) did not flee upon being discovered; (2) did ......
-
State v. Perry, 7114SC691
...or entering of the dwelling house of another with the intent to commit a felony or other infamous crime therein. State v. Cook, 242 N.C. 700, 89 S.E.2d 383 (1955). Defendant contends that the 'felonious intent' in this case can only be proved by information supplied by the unidentified info......
-
State v. Jones, 329
...described in the statute was broken into or entered "with intent to commit a felony or other infamous crime therein." State v. Cook, 242 N.C. 700, 703, 89 S.E.2d 383, 385, and cases cited. Felonious intent, an essential element of the felony defined in G.S. § 14-54, 'must be alleged and pro......