State v. Hatley
| Decision Date | 29 March 1892 |
| Citation | 14 S.E. 751,110 N.C. 522 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | State v. Hatley et al. |
Criminal Law—Construction of Sentence— Suspension.
1. Defendants pleaded guilty of keeping a disorderly house, whereupon the court ordered that they Defendants left the state within 30 days, and returned a short time thereafter, whereupon a capias issued, and they were imprisoned. Beld, that the sentence was not one of banishment or alternative, the clause, "but if defendants leave, " etc., constituting no part of the sentence, and was intended only as a memorandum directing the clerk to postpone the period at which the sentence should go into execution.
2. Where defendants left the state, and soon thereafter returned, they came within the conditions upon which the capias should issue.
Philip Hatley and Martha Hatley were convicted of keeping a disorderly house, and petition for a writ of certiorari. Petition denied.
S.J. Pemberton, for petitioners.
Attorney General, for the State.
The petitioners say that at fall term, 1891, of Stanly superior court, they were tried upon an indictment for keeping a disorderly house, and pleaded guilty to the charge, with the understanding and agreement with the prosecutor in said cause that judgment was to be suspended upon the payment of costs; that the solicitor for the state prayed the judgment of the court; and the court thereupon made the following order: " They further say that their imprisonment is illegal, for that, upon being so sentenced, they left the state within 30 days from the expiration of the term of the court, and went to the state of South Carolina, and remained there for months, and returned about the 7th day of December; and they insist that they had complied with the judgment of the court, but the sheriff of Stanly county, in obedience to a capias issued by the clerk of the superior court of said county, arrested them, and imprisoned them in the common...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Calcutt
... ... requires the performance of one or more alternative ... propositions and is incapable of enforcement because the ... selection involves a function which may only be performed by ... the Court, and such a judgment is void. Strickland v ... Cox, 102 N.C. 411, 9 S.E. 414; State v. Hatley, ... 110 N.C. 522, 14 S.E. 751. With some exceptions, not ... necessary to consider here, it must be sufficiently ... definitive to permit enforcement ministerially by its ... inherent directions. The sentence before us meets this ... As has ... been shown, the defendant ... ...
-
Dawson v. Sisk
... ... to-wit: this 29th day of December, 1938, defendant appears by ... attorney, Robert Munger; State appears by Asst. County ... Attorney John Mulhall. Defendant pleads guilty. On ... recommendation of county attorney, the Court orders and ... ex rel. Buckley v. Drew, 75 N.H. 402, 74 A. 875; Sylvester v ... State, 65 N.H. 193, 20 A. 954; State v. Hatley, 110 N.C. 522, ... 14 S.E. 751, 752; State v. Whitt, 117 N.C. 804, 23 S.E. 452, ... 453; Tanner v. Wiggins, 54 Fla. 203, 45 So. 459, 14 Ann.Cas ... ...
-
State v. Doughtie
...to pass a sentence of banishment; and if it does so, the sentence is void. This is the general rule in American Courts. State v. Hatley, 110 N.C. 522, 14 S.E. 751. 'In the states of the United States, a sentence banishing one convicted of crime from the state is generally held to be beyond ......
-
Ex parte Fisher
... ... January 15, 1924 ... Syllabus ... by the Court ... While ... the courts of this state under the Constitution have inherent ... power and discretion in the trial of criminal cases and ... imposition of the penalties fixed by law, ... State v. Abbott, 87 S.C. 466, 70 S.E. 6, 33 L.R.A ... (N. S.) 112, Ann.Cas. 1912B, 1189; Sylvester v ... State, 65 N.H. 193; State v. Hatley, 110 N.C ... 522, 14 S.E. 751; Tanner v. Wiggins, 54 Fla. 203, 45 ... Fla. 459, 14 Ann.Cas. 718; Ragland v. State, 55 Fla ... 157, 46 So. 724; ... ...