State v. Lutterloh

• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: STACY, J.
• Citation: State v. Lutterloh, 188 N.C. 412, 124 S.E. 752 (N.C. 1924)
• Decision Date: 22 October 1924
• Docket Number: 274.
• Parties: STATE v. LUTTERLOH.

124 S.E. 752

188 N.C. 412

STATE v. LUTTERLOH.

No. 274.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

October 22, 1924

Appeal from Superior Court, New Hanover County; Devin, Judge.

George Lutterloh was convicted of manslaughter, and appeals. No error.

Question of guilt of manslaughter in running into standing automobile and persons beside it held for jury.

Rountree & Carr, W. F. Jones, and Herbert McClammy, all of Wilmington for appellant.

J. S Manning, Atty. Gen., and Frank Nash, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

STACY J.

The defendant, a respectable colored man of Wilmington, N. C was charged with the murder of Mrs. Vera Bryant on April 13 1924. He was convicted of manslaughter. The homicide was caused by the defendant's criminal negligence in the operation of an automobile. He appeals, assigning errors in the trial.

There was evidence on behalf of the state tending to show that on Sunday afternoon, April 13, 1924, Woody Bryant and his wife, Mrs. Vera Bryant, accompanied by several friends, were out riding in a Ford car on the public road leading from Wilmington to Castle Hayne, the latter a village about eight miles north of the first-named city. As they were returning home, they stopped their car on the side of the road, with the left-hand wheels resting on the hard-surfaced portion, and were out mending a tire, when the defendant, driving a seven-passenger Buick automobile, struck them from the rear, knocking the Ford car, with its brakes on, a distance of 51 feet, hitting the witness Barnhill, who was in the act of mending the tire, and dragging Mrs. Bryant about 41 feet, inflicting fatal injuries upon her, from which she died that night after having been carried to the hospital in Wilmington. It was in evidence that the defendant was driving at the rate of about 40 miles an hour and that he was under the influence of an intoxicant at the time of the injury. There was another colored man in defendant's car who was undoubtedly drunk, and in the bottom of the automobile two coca-cola bottles were found with strong odors of whisky about them.

The defendant, on the other hand, offered evidence tending to show that he was not under the influence of an intoxicant at the time of the accident; that he had only tasted a little whisky that day, but had not swallowed any of it; that his friend and companion was not drunk, but only sick from the effects of drinking. He further testified that he was not driving over 20 miles an hour; that it was getting dark when the collision occurred; that his automobile lights were burning, but constructed so as to focus just ahead of him; that Mrs. Bryant was standing at the rear of the Ford car, leaning on the left fender so as to obstruct the defendant's view of the rear light, if actually burning, about which there is a conflict in the testimony; and that the defendant was unable to discover the situation in time to avoid the accident.

Out of this conflicting evidence, the jury found the defendant guilty of manslaughter and so returned its verdict. It was peculiarly a question of fact for the jury.

The defendant complains at the action...