State v. Midgett
| Decision Date | 27 May 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 702SC54,702SC54 |
| Citation | 8 N.C.App. 230,174 S.E.2d 124 |
| Parties | STATE of North Carolina v. Larry Donald MIDGETT, Bradley Johnson, Donnie Blount, Martin Wayne Collins, Lonnie Gibbs, Van Gray Gibbs, Henry Vanderbilt Johnson, Jr., Sammy Lee Bryant, Felton Gibbs, Alvin Spencer, Clarence Coward and Benjamin Phelps. |
| Court | North Carolina Court of Appeals |
Atty. Gen. Robert Morgan, by Staff Atty. Burley B. Mitchell, Jr., Raleigh, for the State.
Chambers, Stein, Ferguson & Lanning, by James E. Ferguson, II, Charlotte, for defendants-appellants.
It is settled law in North Carolina that the imposition in a given case of a greater sentence in the Superior Court Division upon trial De novo than was imposed in the District Court Division is constitutionally permissible. State v. Spencer, 7 N.C.App. 282, 172 S.E.2d 280 (1970), (affirmed, North Carolina Supreme Court, 173 S.E.2d 765, 13 May 1970). This assignment of error has no merit.
The motion to quash the supplemental jury venire is directed to the sound discretion of the trial court, and in the absence of evidence of abuse of discretion will not be disturbed on appeal. State v. Oxentine, 270 N.C. 412, 154 S.E.2d 529 (1967). The record discloses the following:
The court finds that the Order for supplementary jurors was entered on May 24, 1969, after conferring with defendants' counsel and the solicitor, and a copy of the Order was immediately sent to the defendants' counsel, therefore, the request to delay the proceedings is denied. The motion to quash is ordered ruled denied.
MR. FERGUSON: The defendants except.'
This assignment of error is without merit.
On a motion of nonsuit, the evidence is taken in the light most favorable to the State. State v. Goines, 273 N.C. 509, 160 S.E.2d 469 (1968). In that light, the evidence tends to show that the defendants entered the office of the secretary to the principal and told her 'they were going to interrupt us that day.' They locked the secretary out of her office, moved furniture about, scattered papers and dumped some books on the floor. She, Mr. Hunter and Mr. Williams were drawn or kept away from their jobs or classes by this action. School was dismissed because of the 'presence of non-students' (both in and about the school and in the principal's office), disruption and 'commotion,' which included the occupying of the principal's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
A.M. ex rel. F.M. v. Holmes
...disorders across an entire school. See, e.g. , State v. Wiggins , 272 N.C. 147, 158 S.E.2d 37, 42–44 (1967) ; State v. Midgett , 8 N.C.App. 230, 174 S.E.2d 124, 127–28 (1970). But they've also refused to hold students criminally liable for classroom antics that “momentarily divert[ed] atten......
-
In re T.K.
...of the educational process in the school. See generally State v. Wiggins , 272 N.C. 147, 158 S.E.2d 37 (1967) ; State v. Midgett , 8 N.C.App. 230, 174 S.E.2d 124 (1970) ; In re M.J.G. , 234 N.C.App. 350, 759 S.E.2d 361 (2014). In State v. Wiggins , our Supreme Court considered convictions a......
-
In re MG
...the convictions because the picketing created disorder in the entire school. Wiggins, 272 N.C. at 150-52, 158 S.E.2d at 39-41. In State v. Midgett, the defendants took over the school office by force, telling the school's secretary that "`they were going to interrupt [the school] that day.'......
-
Eller, Matter of
...court's conviction for disorderly conduct. Even more disruptive behavior was considered by the Court of Appeals in State v. Midgett, 8 N.C.App. 230, 174 S.E.2d 124 (1970). There, twelve students entered the school secretary's office and informed the secretary that " 'they were going to inte......