State v. Earp
Decision Date | 17 October 1928 |
Docket Number | 241. |
Citation | 145 S.E. 23,196 N.C. 164 |
Parties | STATE v. EARP et al. |
Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, Wake County; Cranmer, Judge.
Clifton Earp and another were convicted of forcible trespass, and they appeal. No error.
The defendants were convicted of forcible trespass. The evidence of James Johnson, prosecuting witness, for the state, was to the effect That he rented a farm on halves from J. J. Norris, at Holly Springs, in Wake county, N. C.; he furnished the stock and did the work. Norris owned two places. On the place Johnson lived, which he rented from Norris, there was no barn, or stables, or crib. There was a strip of land between this place and the other place owned by Norris; on this place there was a barn and stables, which were rented to Johnson to keep his stock in, in connection with the other place. He was in possession of same on January 20, 1928; had his mules fodder, and raw food in the stables, and corn in the crib. The stables were locked by Johnson. This was the third year Johnson had been in possession of the stables. Clifton Earp had moved on the place on January 17th, where the barn was located. He told Johnson, prior to the 20th, to clear the barn and get the mules out, as he wanted to put his feed and mules in. Johnson told him he had the place rented for the year and he could not do it. '
What occurred is described by Johnson as follows:
J. J. Norris, a witness for defendants, testified in part:
Cross-examination:
The assignments of error will be considered in the opinion.
J. C. Little, of Raleigh, for appellants.
Dennis G. Brummitt, Atty. Gen., and Frank Nash, Asst. Atty., Gen., for the State.
At the close of the evidence for the state, and at the conclusion of all the evidence, the defendants moved to dismiss the action or for judgment of nonsuit. C. S. § 4643. The court below refused the motion, and in this we think there was no error.
An exception to a motion to dismiss in a criminal action, taken after the close of the state's evidence, and renewed by defendant after the introduction of his own evidence, does not confine the appeal to the state's evidence alone, and a conviction will be sustained under the second exception, if there is any sufficient evidence on the whole record of the defendant's guilt. State v. Brinkley, 183 N.C. 720, 110 S.E. 783; State v. White, 196 N.C. 1, 144 S.E. 299.
The evidence tended to show that the prosecuting witness Johnson, was in the actual possession of the stables and barn. Johnson's mules were in the stables. The stables had been locked by him. Clifton Earp and Ray Earp, the defendants, in company with J. J. Norris, went to the stables, and Clifton Earp took a hammer, and jerked the staples out, "and opened the door," and turned the mules out, and he did the same in regard to the other stable. Ray Earp, the other defendant, was present aiding. The prosecuting witness, Johnson, was present forbidding defendants. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Marion
... ... relied on by defendant in this court is based, requires a ... consideration of the entire evidence in order to determine ... whether or not there was error in the trial as contended by ... defendant on his appeal to this court. State v ... Earp, 196 N.C. 164, 145 S.E. 23; State v ... Pasour, 183 N.C. 793, 111 S.E. 779; State v ... Brinkley, 183 N.C. 720, 110 S.E. 783 ... The ... practice firmly established in this jurisdiction, and the ... rule uniformly applied by this court, in considering and ... deciding the ... ...
-
State v. Eubanks, 290.
...under the second exception, if there is any sufficient evidence on the whole record of the defendant's guilt." State v. Earp, 196 N.C. 164, 166, 145 S.E. 23, 24. See State v. Carlson, 171 N.C. 818, 89 S.E. 30; State v. Sigmon, 190 N.C. 684, 130 S.E. 854. The evidence favorable alone to the ......
-
State v. Norton
...before the court. C.S. § 4643; State v. Killian, 173 N.C. 792, 92 S.E. 499; State v. Pasour, 183 N.C. 793, 111 S.E. 779; State v. Earp, 196 N.C. 164, 145 S.E. 23. such case defendant is entitled to the benefit only of exception to the refusal of the latter motion. C.S. § 4643. State v. Brin......
-
State v. Ammons
... ... his own evidence, does not confine the appeal to the ... State's evidence alone, and a conviction will be ... sustained ... [169 S.E. 633] ... under the second exception if there is any evidence on the ... whole record of the defendant's guilt.' State v ... Earp, 196 N.C. 164, at page 166, 145 S.E. 23, 24. See ... State v. Carlson, 171 N.C. 818, 89 S.E. 30; ... State v. Sigmon, 190 N.C. 684, 130 S.E. 854. The ... evidence favorable alone to the state is considered; ... defendant's evidence is discarded. State v ... Utley, 126 N.C. 997, 35 S.E. 428 ... ...