State v. Furr

• Citation: 28 S.E. 552,121 N.C. 606
• Parties: STATE v. FURR.
• Decision Date: 23 December 1897
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina

28 S.E. 552

121 N.C. 606

STATE v. FURR.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

December 23, 1897

Appeal from superior court, Cabarrus county; Coble, Judge.

M. M Furr was convicted of compounding a felony, and he appeals. Affirmed.

When persons accused of larceny voluntarily pay the value of the stolen goods and the costs of prosecution, their conduct is evidence of their guilt.

Morrison Caldwell, for appellant.

The Attorney General, for the State.

MONTGOMERY J.

The defendants, M. M. Furr, a justice of the peace, D. M Widenhouse, Jason Furr, Hiram Cox, and Luther Bost, were indicted for compounding a felony, charged in the indictment to have been committed by the last three of the above named. The defendants Widenhouse and M. M. Furr, the justice of the peace, alone were put upon trial. There seems to be a conflict between the printed record and the transcript as to whether Widenhouse was tried and convicted, but that is immaterial, as the defendant M. M. Furr is the only appellant here. The special instructions asked by the defendant were given just as requested, except that the fourth was modified. In that fourth prayer the defendant asked his honor to give an instruction in the following words: "(4) The defendant M. M. Furr, being a justice of the peace, is not guilty of compounding a felony for merely making an honest mistake in judgment in regard to his duty to dismiss the defendants charged before him with the felony. If he, through ignorance of law, failed to conduct the case against the defendants, charged with the stealing of the goods of Mrs Widenhouse, in a regular and orderly manner, he is not guilty. The jury must be fully satisfied that said Furr acted in such case corruptly, and for a reward or advantage." His honor gave every word of it, except that he left out the words "he is not guilty," and substituted therefor, "this alone would not make him guilty." On the motion for a new trial, the grounds for the same were based, first, on an alleged insufficiency of the evidence as to the receipt by Furr of any benefit or advantage derived from the alleged compounding, or that he had made any agreement not to prosecute the defendants Jason Furr, Cox, and Bost.

The matter alleged as a first ground for a new trial was too late. Exceptions to the sufficiency of evidence must be taken before verdict. State v. Harris, 120 N.C. 577, 26 S.E. 774. In respect to the matters constituting the second alleged ground for the motion, we find that the charge was sufficiently clear and full. That part of the charge was as follows: "It is for the jury to decide from the evidence if the state has satisfied you, beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant Widenhouse had had certain property stolen, and that certain parties, Jason Furr, Hiram Cox, and Luther Bost, were charged with the crime, and that said parties, Jason Furr, Hiram Cox, and Luther Bost, paid defendant Widenhouse a certain amount of money, and that in consideration of the money paid him he agreed to put an end to the prosecution against said parties, or agreed, in consideration of the money paid him, not to prosecute them for the crime charged; and if the jury are further satisfied, beyond a reasonable doubt, that defendant Furr...