State v. Davis
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | DEVIN |
| Citation | State v. Davis, 238 N.C. 252, 77 S.E.2d 630 (N.C. 1953) |
| Decision Date | 23 September 1953 |
| Docket Number | No. 2,2 |
| Parties | STATE, 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.
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: 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 FreeStart 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
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
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
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
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
Start Your Free Trial
-
State v. Henderson
...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
...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
...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
...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......