State v. Locklear
| Decision Date | 30 June 1853 |
| Citation | 44 N.C. 205 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE v. NOEL LOCKLEAR. |
The wearing or carrying about the person, or keeping in the house by a free negro any one of the articles prohibited by the Act of 1840, ch. 40, (as a rifle, musket, bowieknife. &c.,) is a distinct offence, and should be so charged in the bill of indictment.
But where the indictment charged, in the same count, the carrying of a “musket, rifle and shot gun, proof of the unlawful carrying of either one of the articles, is sufficient to justify a conviction; and the objection to the indictment cannot be taken advantage of, either at the trial, or upon a motion in arrest of judgment.
(The case of State v. Haney, 2 Dev. & Bat. 402, cited and approved.)
THE defendant was indicted under the Act of Assembly prohibiting free persons of color from wearing or carrying arms about their persons. The indictment charged that he carried about his person a rifle, a musket and a shot-gun; and the proof was that he carried a shot-gun.
Upon the trial, before his Honor Judge DICK, at Robeson, on the last Spring circuit, it was insisted for the defendant that he could not be convicted unless he carried all the arms charged in the bill of indictment; but his Honor being of opinion that he could be convicted upon proof that he carried either of them, so charged the jury; and upon a verdict and judgment accordingly against the defendant, he appealed to the Supreme Court.
Troy and D. Reid, for the defendant .
Attorney General, for the State .
The Act of 1840, ch. 30, on which the defendant was indicted, declares that “if any free negro, mulatto or free person of color shall wear, or carry about his or her person, or keep in his or her house any shot-gun, musket, rifle, pistol, sword, dagger or bowie-knife, unless he or she shall have obtained a license therefor from the Court of Pleas and Quarter Session of his or her county, within one year next preceding the wearing, keeping or carrying thereof, he or she shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and may be indicted therefor.” We think it clear that the wearing, carrying about the person, or keeping in the house any of these prohibited articles is a distinct offence, and ought to be so charged in the bill of indictment, and proved on the trial. Whether the charging of two or more of them in the same count is bad for duplicity, so that the defendant might have objected to it on special demurrer, or had it quashed on...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Burnett
...416; State v. Hart, 116 N. C. 978, 20 S. E. 1014; State v. Cooper, supra; State v. Haney, supra; State v. Simons, 70 N. C. 336; State v. Locklear, 44 N. C. 205. The court charged the jury on the first count that they must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the girl was under 14 yea......
-
State v. Burnett
... ... State ... v. Wilson, 121 N.C. 655, 28 S.E. 416; State v ... Hart, 116 N.C. 978, 20 S.E. 1014; State v. Cooper, ... supra; State v ... [55 S.E. 74.] ... Haney, ... supra; State v. Simons, 70 N.C. 336; State v ... Locklear, 44 N.C. 205 ... The ... court charged the jury on the first count that they must be ... satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the girl was under ... 14 years, that she was residing with her father, and that the ... defendant took and carried her away, not only against ... ...
-
State v. Jarrett
... ... a motion to quash, made in apt time, and is cured by verdict ... State v. Wilson, 121 N.C. 655; State v ... Hart, 116 N.C. 978; State v. Cooper, supra [101 ... N.C. 684]; State v. Haney, supra [19 N.C. 390]; ... State v. Simons, 70 N.C. 336; State v. Locklear, 44 ... N.C. 205." ... The ... separate offenses charged in the same warrant or indictment ... are to be considered and treated as separate counts ... In ... State v. Toole, 106 N.C. 740, 11 S.E. 169, it is ... "Where ... the offenses ... ...
-
State v. Wilson
...and it was not necessary for the State to prove that all of the six named persons were killed, as alleged in the indictment. State v. Locklear, 44 N.C. 205; State v. Van Doran, 109 N.C. 864, 14 S.E. 32; State v. O'Keefe, 263 N.C. 53, 138 S.E.2d 767. In respect to the second count in the ind......