State v. Davis

CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtDEVIN
CitationState v. Davis, 238 N.C. 252, 77 S.E.2d 630 (N.C. 1953)
Decision Date23 September 1953
Docket NumberNo. 2,2
PartiesSTATE, v. DAVIS.

Harry McMullan, Atty. Gen., T. W. Bruton, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Charles G. Powell, Jr., Member of Staff, Raleigh, for the State.

Allen, Henderson & Williams, Elkin, for defendant appellant.

DEVIN, Chief Justice.

The defendant's motion for judgment as of nonsuit was properly denied. The evidence was sufficient to carry the case to the jury. State v. Carroll, 226 N.C. 237, 37 S.E.2d 688.

The defendant's assignments of error based upon exceptions noted to rulings of the court in the admission of testimony are without merit. The court's general charge to the jury was free from error, but the defendant noted exception to subsequent instructions given to the jury by the court in response to inquiry from a juror. The circumstances were these: The jury apparently had experienced difficulty in arriving at a verdict. Several times they reported disagreement but were instructed to continue their deliberations. On one of those occasions a juror asked to speak to the Court. The Court replied he could not have a private conversation with a juror, 'You have to return a verdict of guilty or not guilty and no more.' However, the Court stated if the jury was confused as to a matter of law bearing on the case, he would be glad to give further instructions. Thereupon the foreman asked 'Would it be within our rights to ask mercy in this case in rendering the verdict?' To this the Court replied as follows: 'Your responsibility is to answer whether or not you find the defendant guilty or not guilty. The matter of the judgment to be pronounced upon the verdict is entirely the responsibility of the judge, and it is not part of your responsibility at all; in arriving at your verdict, you arrive at a verdict of guilty or not guilty according as you find the facts from the evidence and apply the law as given you by the Court. You may retire and deliberate further.' Thereafter the jury returned verdict of guilty, and the Court rendered the judgment appealed from.

The exceptions based on these expressions of the trial judge afford insufficient basis upon which to award a new trial.

Evidently some of the jurors were unwilling to agree to a conviction, and if the judge had expressly authorized the jury to recommend mercy in rendering their verdict, it would doubtless have been understood as an intimation that if they agreed to such a verdict the court would be...

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
9 cases
  • State v. Henderson
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • March 13, 1974
    ...of the accused without being hindered by the Quantum of punishment possible, probable or certain upon conviction. State v. Davis, 238 N.C. 252, 77 S.E.2d 630; State v. Howard, 222 N.C. 291, 22 S.E.2d 917. Formerly, there was an exception to this general rule in reference to capital cases pu......
  • State v. Britt
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • May 15, 1974
    ...the jury has performed its function and discharged its duty when it returns its verdict of guilty or not guilty. State v. Davis, 238 N.C. 252, 77 S.E.2d 630; State v. Howard, 222 N.C. 291, 22 S.E.2d 917; State v. Matthews, 191 N.C. 378, 131 S.E. '. . . In the absence of some compelling reas......
  • State v. Holloman
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • June 9, 2017
    ...159, 167, 240 S.E.2d 440, 446 (1978) (citing State v. Hammonds , 241 N.C. 226, 85 S.E.2d 133 (1954) ); see also State v. Davis , 238 N.C. 252, 253-54, 77 S.E.2d 630, 631 (1953) (stating that "[c]orrect instruction as to the law ... limit[s] [the trial judge’s] responsibilit[ies]"). Thus, we......
  • Searcy v. Justice
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • February 6, 1974
    ...the facts and evidence before them, and they should not be encouraged to speculate on matters not presented to them. Cf. State v. Davis, 238 N.C. 252, 77 S.E.2d 630. Finally, Rule 51(a) requires that the judge 'give equal stress to the contentions of the various parties' in recapitulating t......
  • Get Started for Free