State v. Hayne
| Decision Date | 28 February 1883 |
| Citation | 88 N.C. 625 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE v. M. E. HAYNE. |
INDICTMENT for a misdemeanor tried at Spring Term, 1883, of BUNCOMBE Superior Court, before Avery, J.
The defendant was charged with a violation of the act of 1879, ch. 127, in carrying a pistol concealed about his person. The act makes it unlawful for any person, except on his own premises, to carry concealed about his person any pistol, &c.; and exempts from its provisions, among others, all civil officers of the United States, of this state, of any county, city or town of this state, while in the discharge of their official duties.
The state introduced one Frances as a witness, who testified that on a certain night in May, 1882, while the United States court was in session in the town of Asheville, hearing a disturbance at a restaurant kept by a person of color in the town, and going to the place, he found the defendant there, intoxicated, and some of his friends carried the defendant to a boarding-house kept by one Hill; and soon afterwards Hill sent up-stairs, where the defendant had gone, and brought him down, refusing to let him stay; that defendant thereupon put his hand behind him toward his hip-pocket, when Hill started off, declaring he would get his gun. Upon hearing this, the defendant ran out of the house and into a barber-shop, and dropped a pistol as he entered, which he picked up and put into his hip-pocket.
The defendant testified, in his own behalf, that he was a United States deputy marshal at the time (showing his commission), and continued to be such until his arrest for this offence, when his commission was revoked; that on the night referred to by the state's witness, he had process in his hands to be executed on citizens of Madison and Buncombe counties, consisting of commissioner's warrants and more than one capias issuing from the United States court, and that he frequently arrested persons after night.
His Honor charged the jury substantially, that if they were satisfied from the evidence that the defendant, while off his own premises, carried a pistol concealed about his person, he would be guilty, unless they believed that he was at the time actually engaged in the discharge of his official duty as deputy marshal; and that the burden was on him to show that he was at the time in the discharge of such duty.
The jury found the defendant guilty, and he appealed from the judgment pronounced.
Attorney-General, for the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Simmons
...in the actual performance of those duties. He does not therefore come within the exception of the statute. Revisal 1905, § 3708; State v. Hayne, 88 N.C. 625; State v. Boone, 132 N.C. 1107, 44 S.E. 595. advice of the clerk of the court that the defendant had, as constable, the right to carry......
-
Williams v. Sossoman's Funeral Home, Inc., 669
...v. Gill, 229 N.C. 313, 49 S.E.2d 754; State v. Kelly, 186 N.C. 365, 119 S.E. 755; State v. Simmons, 143 N.C. 613, 56 S.E. 701; State v. Hayne, 88 N.C. 625; State v. Hogg, 6 N.C. 319; Williams v. Branson, 5 N.C. 417; Oakley v. Allegheny County, 128 Pa.Super. 8, 193 A. For the purpose of this......
-
State v. Boone
...the use of weapons. Still less was he on duty when carrying the pistol concealed from Topsy to his house, half a mile away. In State v. Hayne, 88 N.C. 625, court held that "the exemption from the provisions of the statute is only given to such officers while in the actual discharge of their......
-
State v. Boone
...the use of weapons. Still less was he on duty when carrying the pistol concealed from Topsy to his house, half a mile away. In State v. Hayne, 88 N. C. 625, this court held that "the exemption from the provisions of the statute is only given to such officers while in the actual discharge of......