State v. Harvell
| Decision Date | 22 October 1930 |
| Docket Number | No. 273.,273. |
| Citation | 155 S.E. 257 |
| Parties | STATE. v. HARVELL. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, Brunswick County; Cranmer, Judge.
C. H. Harvell, alias Charlie Harvell, was convicted under two bills of indictment charging him with a violation of the Prohibition Law, and he appeals.
No error.
R. M. Kermon, of Wilmington, for appellant.
Dennis G. Brummitt, Atty. Gen., and Frank Nash, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Two bills of indictment were returned against the defendant charging him with a violation of the Prohibition Law on August 5, 1929, and March 30, 1930, respectively. Without objection the indictments were tried together, and on each the defendant was convicted. In the first, judgment was pronounced, but execution was suspended upon terms to which the defendant consented; in the second, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment and to the roads.
The record contains only two exceptions. The first relates to the refusal of the judge to set aside the verdict on the ground that it was contrary to the weight of the evidence—a matter within the discretion of the judge and not reviewable on appeal when not abused. Hoke v. Whisnant and Tilley, 174 N. C. 658, 94 S. E. 446; Bailey v. Mineral Co., 183 N. C. 525, 112 S. E. 29.
The second exception is that, as both indictments were tried together, only one judgment should have been pronounced. The defendant was tried upon distinct indictments which the trial court was authorized to consolidate. C. S. § 4622.
Where there are several counts, and each is for a distinct offense, a general verdict of guilty will apply to each, and judgment may be pronounced on each count. State v. Mills, 181 N. C. 530, 106 S. E. 677. In any event, since the sentences are concurrent, the defendant was not prejudiced in this respect.
No error.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Austin
...of guilty will authorize the imposition of a judgment on each count. State v. Braxton, 230 N.C. 312, 52 S.E.2d 895; State v. Harvell, 199 N.C. 599, 155 S.E. 257; State v. Mills, 181 N.C. 530, 106 S.E. Likewise, where there are several counts in a bill, and a general verdict of guilty is ret......
-
State v. Braxton
...count is for a distinct offense, a general verdict of guilty will authorize the imposition of a judgment on each count. State v. Harvell, 199 N.C. 599, 155 S.E. 257. Likewise, where there are several counts in a bill, and a general verdict of guilty is returned, the Court may impose judgmen......
-
Story v. Slade
... ... The present case, therefore, comes squarely within the decisions in Hardy v. Abdallah, 192 N. C. 45, 133 S. E. 195, and North State Piano Co. v. Spruill, 150 N. C. 168, 63 S. E. 723, in which similar references were held to be insufficient to take the place of proper ... ...
-
State v. Johnson
...a consolidation unjust and prejudicial to defendant.' Accord, State v. Waters, 208 N.C. 769, 182 S.E. 483 (1935); State v. Harvell, 199 N.C. 599, 155 S.E. 257 (1930); State v. Charles, 195 N.C. 868, 142 S.E. 486 Defendant relies on the following language in State v. Combs, supra: 'The court......