State v. High
| Decision Date | 08 March 1939 |
| Docket Number | No. 73.,73. |
| Citation | 215 N.C. 244,1 S.E.2d 563 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE. v. HIGH et al. |
Appeal from Superior Court, Nash County; Luther Hamilton, Special Judge.
E. B. High and W. I. Tanner were convicted of assault with a deadly weapon, and W. I. Tanner alone appeals.
Affirmed.
Criminal action in which the defendants were tried under a bill of indictment charging them with felonious assault with intent to kill, as defined in C.S. § 4213.
The State offered evidence tending to show that K. B. Matthews, a merchant in the City of Rocky Mount, on Saturday night, March 12, 1938, drove to his home about midnight; that as he got out of the car and attempted to leave his garage he was assaulted with deadly weapons by two persons; that he was struck a number of times with iron pipes about the head and body; that at the time he had more than $300 on his person; and that Matthews identified the two defendants as being the persons who assaulted him. There was other evidence tending to indicate that the defendants were the persons who committed the assault. The defendants offered evidence tending to contradict the evidence offered by the State as to the identity of the assailants and other evidence tending to establish an alibi for each of the defendants.
The court in charging the jury instructed them that they could return either one of five verdicts as they found the facts to be, to-wit, Guilty of a felonious assault as charged in the bill of indictment; guilty of an assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury; guilty of an assault with a deadly weapon; guilty of a simple assault, or not guilty. In so doing the Court properly placed the burden of proof upon the State. After the jury had been out for some time it returned to the court room and its spokesman informed the court that the jury wanted to know in what degree of guilt the jurors could make it as light as possible. The Court inquired if the jury meant that they did not understand the instructions with regard to the various offenses. The spokesman replied "We cannot carry all of them." Thereupon the Court again outlined the offense charged and the lesser degrees thereof upon which a verdict of guilty might be returned, particularly outlining the difference between assault with a deadly weapon and a simple assault. The jury returned to its room and shortly thereafter returned a verdict of guilty of assault with a deadly weapon. Judgment was pronounced thereon and the defendant Tanner appealed.
T. T. Thorne, of Rocky Mount, and W. H....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Bentley
... ... 2 ... Assault with deadly weapon, without intent to kill, but with ... intent to injure. State v. McNeill, 75 N.C. 15; ... State v. Smith, 174 N.C. 804, 93 S.E. 910 ... [223 ... N.C. 570] 3. Assault with deadly weapon. State v ... High, 215 N.C. 244, 1 S.E.2d 563; State v ... Elmore, 212 N.C. 531, 193 S.E. 713; State v. Hefner, ... supra; State v. Sudderth, 184 N.C. 753, 114 S.E ... 828, 27 A.L.R. 1180 ... 4 ... Common assault and battery. C.S. § 4215; State v. McNeill, ... supra; State v. Earnest, 98 ... ...
-
State v. Matthews
...G.S. §§ 15-169, 15-170; State v. Jackson, 199 N.C. 321, 154 S.E. 402; State v. Williams, 185 N.C. 685, 116 S.E. 736; State v. High, 215 N.C. 244, 1 S.E.2d 563; State v. Jones, 222 N.C. 37, 38, 21 S.E.2d 812; State v. Bentley, 223 N.C. 563, 27 S.E.2d 738; State v. Weinstein, 224 N.C. 645, 31......
-
State v. Ardrey
...there no reference to the lesser degrees of the principal crime, save one, State v. Burnette, 213 N.C. 153, 195 S.E. 356; State v. High, 215 N.C. 244, 1 S.E.2d 563; State v. Bentley, 223 N.C. 563, 27 S.E.2d 738, but the charge also fails to explain the law arising upon the facts in evidence......
-
State v. Roy
...Moore, 227 N.C. 326, 42 S.E.2d 84; State v. Gay, 224 N.C. 141, 29 S.E.2d 458; State v. Jones, 222 N.C. 37, 21 S.E.2d 812; State v. High, 215 N.C. 244, 1 S.E.2d 563; State v. Williams, 185 N.C. 685, 116 S.E. 736; State v. Hill, 181 N.C. 558, 107 S.E. 140. And although all the evidence may po......