State v. Davis

Decision Date30 April 1958
Docket NumberNo. 433,433
CitationState v. Davis, 248 N.C. 318, 103 S.E.2d 289 (N.C. 1958)
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesSTATE, v. Isaac DAVIS.

George B. Patton, Atty. Gen., T. W. Bruton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Carl E. Caddy, Jr., Raleigh, for defendant.

DENNY, Justice.

It appears that the defendant was without counsel when he was convicted and sentenced on the charge of breaking and entering at the March Term 1956 of the Superior Court of Wake County. There is no showing that the appointment of defense counsel was essential to a fair trial in the Superior Court, or that the appointment of counsel was requested. State v. Hackney, 240 N.C. 230, 81 S.E.2d 778.

There is no statutory requirement in this jurisdiction that indigent defendants not accused of capital felonies must have court appointed counsel. State v. Hedgebeth, 228 N.C. 259, 45 S.E.2d 563; State v. Cruse, 238 N.C. 53, 76 S.E.2d 320. Cf. State v. Simpson, 243 N.C. 436, 90 S.E.2d 708, and see G.S. § 15-4.1.

A defendant has the constitutional right to be represented by counsel and to have counsel assigned, if requested, when the circumstances are such as to show apparent necessity for counsel to protect his rights. But in the absence of a request therefor, the propriety of providing counsel for a person accused of an offense less than a capital felony, rests in the sound discretion of the trial judge. State v. Hedgebeth, supra; In re Taylor, 230 N.C. 566, 53 S.E.2d 857; State v. Hackney, supra. See People v. Logan, 137 Cal.App.2d 331, 290 P.2d 11, where numerous authorities from many jurisdictions are cited.

The fact that Judge Hobgood ordered the sentence imposed at the March Term 1956 into effect at the May Term 1956, after finding as a fact that the defendant had not served his case on appeal within the time allowed by the court, did not prevent the defendant from having his appeal docketed in the Supreme Court for review of the record proper. But since the defendant did not request the appointment of counsel, and did not cause his appeal to be docketed in order that it might be heard on the record proper, nor apply for a writ of certiorari at the Fall Term 1956, a judge of the superior court was thereafter without power to enlarge the time for serving case on appeal. State v. Walker, 245 N.C. 658, 97 S.E.2d 219, and cited cases.

The present case demonstrates the necessity for the strict enforcement of our rules relating to appeals. For example, the defendant in this case waited approximately twenty months before raising any objection to his trial and conviction or to the judgment imposed. Then when judgment was purportedly arrested on 13 November 1957, and counsel was appointed for him and he was given twenty days in which to serve his case on appeal, there is nothing before us to indicate that he made any effort to...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
4 cases
  • Neal v. Culver
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • January 23, 1961
    ...other cases where 'injustice may be done if provision is not made therefor'). North Carolina: N.C.Gen.Stat. § 15—4.1. See State v. Davis, 248 N.C. 318, 103 S.E.2d 289. Pennsylvania: Purdon's Pa.Stat. Tit. 19, §§ 783, 784 (capital Rhode Island: Gen.Laws of Rhode Island, § 12—15—3. See State ......
  • Hammond v. State of North Carolina
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of North Carolina
    • March 3, 1964
    ...if it deems proper, to appoint counsel where that course seems to be required in the interest of fairness.'" See also State v. Davis, 248 N.C. 318, 103 S.E.2d 289 (1958); 33 N.C.Law Review In the case at hand the petitioner was tried without assistance of counsel and, apparently, without kn......
  • State v. Ivey
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • April 30, 1958
  • State v. Lane, 653
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • December 12, 1962
    ...of providing counsel for a person accused of an offense less than capital is in the discretion of the trial judge. State v. Davis, 248 N.C. 318, 103 S.E.2d 289. In this case the trial judge, presumably in recognition of an apparent necessity, of his own motion appointed counsel for defendan......