State v. Ferebee
| Decision Date | 02 March 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 3,3 |
| Citation | 266 N.C. 606,146 S.E.2d 666 |
| Parties | STATE, v. Percy Bell FEREBEE. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Atty. Gen. T. W. Bruton and Asst. Atty. Gen. Bernard A. Harrell for the State.
W. R. Francis, Waynesville, Thad D. Bryson, Jr., Bryson City, and Felix E. Alley, Jr., Waynesville, for defendant appellant.
Defendant's purported assignments of error are not based on exceptions duly noted in apt time and are ineffectual. 1 Strong, N.C. Index, Appeal and Error § 19.
Defendant's brief asserts the 'Question Involved' is: 'Did the Court, in refusing to continue this case to a subsequent term, deprive the defendant of constitutional rights to which he was entitled?'
'Granting or denying a motion for continuance rests in the sound discretion of the presiding judge and his decision will not be disturbed on appeal, except for abuse of discretion or a showing the defendant has been deprived of a fair trial.' State v. Ipock, 242 N.C. 119, 86 S.E.2d 798; 1 Strong, N.C. Index, Criminal Law § 86. Defendant has failed to show abuse of discretion or that he has been deprived of a fair trial.
State v. O'Neal, 197 N.C. 548, 149 S.E. 860; State v. Hartsfield, 188 N.C. 357, 124 S.E. 629; Harriet Cotton Mills v. Local No. 578, 251 N.C. 218, 228-229, 111 S.E.2d 457. True, a sentence imposing corporal punishment may not be pronounced against a defendant in his absence. State v. Brooks, 211 N.C. 702, 191 S.E. 749, and cases cited. Here, the judgment pronounced imposes no active or suspended sentence of corporal punishment. The fine and costs are collectible as provided in G.S. § 15-185. See State v. Bryant, 251 N.C. 423, 111 S.E.2d 591.
Since defendant has failed to show error, Judge Clarkson's judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.
MOORE, J., not sitting.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Huff
...held that in a capital felony the prisoner cannot waive his right to be present at any stage of the trial.' " State v. Ferebee, 266 N.C. 606, 609, 146 S.E.2d 666, 668 (1966) (emphasis added) (quoting State v. O'Neal, 197 N.C. 548, 549, 149 S.E. 860, 860 (1929)). In light of the language in ......
-
State v. Rogers, 20
...assignments of error based on exceptions duly taken are considered. Langley v. Langley, 268 N.C. 415, 150 S.E.2d 764; State v. Ferebee, 266 N.C. 606, 146 S.E.2d 666; State v. Mallory, 266 N.C. 31, 145 S.E.2d 335, 18 A.L.R.3d 1340, cert. den., 384 U.S. 928, 86 S.Ct. 1443, 16 L.Ed.2d 531. Que......
-
State v. Baldwin
...2d, Criminal Law § 91; State v. Moses, 272 N.C. 509, 158 S.E.2d 617; State v. Stinson, 267 N.C. 661, 148 S.E.2d 593; State v. Ferebee, 266 N.C. 606, 146 S.E.2d 666; State v. Arnold, 258 N.C. 563, 129 S.E.2d 229; State v. Stroud, 254 N.C. 765, 119 S.E.2d 907; Cleeland v. Cleeland, 249 N.C. 1......
-
State v. Taylor
...To be effectual, assignments of error must be based on exceptions duly noted at trial to rulings of the trial court. State v. Ferebee, 266 N.C. 606, 146 S.E.2d 666 (1966); State v. Mallory, 266 N.C. 31, 145 S.E.2d 335 (1965), Cert. denied, 384 U.S. 928, 86 S.Ct. 1443, 16 L.Ed.2d 531 (1966);......