State v. Covington
| Decision Date | 14 November 1899 |
| Citation | 34 S.E. 272,125 N.C. 641 |
| Parties | STATE. v. COVINGTON. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
CRIMINAL LAW—HIGHWAYS—WORKING PUBLIC ROADS—SERVICE OF NOTICE—EXCUSE FOR FAILURE TO WORK.
1. Under Code, § 2020, making it an offense for one liable to such duty to fail to work the public roads after being notified, etc., an indictment charging the offense need not allege willfulness.
2. Code, § 2044, providing that, when a road overseer is not able to "personally" notify persons liable for duty, he shall leave the summons at their houses, does not require service by the overseer "personally, " but refers to personal service on those liable.
3. Inability from sickness is an excuse for failing to work the roads under Code, § 2017, requiring all "able-bodied" males between certain ages to work the roads.
Appeal from superior court, Richmond county; Robinson, Judge.
W. W. Covington was indicted for failing to work the public roads, and was found not guilty, and the state appeals. Affirmed.
The Attorney General and J. D. Shaw, Jr., for the State.
W. H. Neal and J. H. Cook, for defendant.
This was an indictment for failing to work the public roads.
The first exception is because the warrant does not charge that the defendant "unlawfully and willfully" failed to work the public roads. Those words are not in the statute (Code, § 2020), and, as a general rule, it is sufficient if the indictment follows the words of the statute. State v. George, 93 N. C. 567, and cases cited. The fact of failure to work the roads by one liable to such duty, after being notified, and without paying the one dollar to procure exemption, constitutes the offense, without allegation or proof of willfulness; any excuse, as in the present case, being a matter of defense. The omission of the words "willfully and unlawfully, " therefore, is not fatal. State v. Howe, 100 N. C. 449, 5 S. E. 671.
Another exception is that the summons to work the road was left at the house of the defendant, not by the overseer himself, but by another, acting as his agent or deputy. We do not see how the defendant was injuriously affected thereby, or why the overseer could not send the notice by another, to be left at the defendant's house. The defendant relies upon the provision in Code, § 2044: "When an overseer shall not be able to personally notify the hands * * * he shall leave at the house a written summons." The personal service therein mentioned means service on the defendant personally, and, if not to be had, then by leaving notice at his house. It does not mean service by the overseer personally (which is not even required of the sheriff in serving legal process), and therefore that service by his agent or deputy is void.
The defendant further contends that he is not guilty, because the special verdict finds "that the defendant was notified to work the road on the 22d of April, 1898; that he was sick on that day, and was so sick that he was unable to work the road." It has been decided at this term, in State v. Sharp, 34 S. E. 264, that the statutory requirement of all able-bodied male persons between the ages of 18 and 45 years to work on the public...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Commissioners of Johnston County v. Lacy
... 93 S.E. 482 74 N.C. 141 COMMISSIONERS OF JOHNSTON COUNTY v. LACY, STATE TREASURER. No. 250. Supreme Court of North Carolina September 26, 1917 ... Appeal ... from Superior Court, Wake County; Devin, ... accruing to landowners and the property interests from their ... nonpayment of taxes for road building. State v ... Covington, 125 N.C. 644, 34 S.E. 272. When public ... sentiment was awakened to the injustice and inefficiency of ... this system, gradually we began to ... ...
-
State v. Long
... ... occurred out of the state, that is a matter, as we have seen, ... to be proven in defense. If the defendant had wished fuller ... information in regard to matters not named in the statute as ... ingredients of the offense, and therefore not required to be ... charged (State v. Covington, 125 N.C. 642, 34 S.E ... 272), so as to prepare his defense, such as the time and ... places of the marriages, he should have asked for a bill of ... particulars ... [57 S.E. 351.] ... as is now provided by Revisal 1905, § 3244. State v ... Brady, 107 N.C. 826, 12 S.E. 325; State v ... ...
-
State v. Yoder
... ... warrant issued thereon, and come up fully to all the ... requirements as set out in the following cases: State v ... Smith, 98 N.C. 747, 4 S.E. 517; State v. Pool, ... 106 N.C. 698, 10 S.E. 1033; State v. Neal, 109 N.C ... 859, 13 S.E. 784; State v. Covington, 125 N.C. 641, ... 34 S.E. 272. "The affidavit and warrant, in ... contemplation of law, are one, if one is referred to by the ... other" (as was here the case). State v. Davis, ... 111 N.C. 729, 16 S.E. 540; State v. Sykes, 104 N.C ... 694, 10 S.E. 191; State v. Sharp, 125 N. C., at page ... ...
-
Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. United States
... ... the United States, having an office and place of business at ... South Rocky Mount in the state of North Carolina ... Of the ... offenses made the basis of this prosecution, 41 were ... violations of section 2 of the act (defective ... matters not named in the statute as ingredients of the ... offense, and therefore not required to be charged ( State ... v. Covington, 125 N.C. 642, 34 S.E. 272), so as to ... prepare his defense, such as the times and places of the ... marriages, he should have asked for a bill ... ...