State v. Minton

• Decision Date: 25 February 1948
• Docket Number: 74.
• Citation: 46 S.E.2d 296,228 N.C. 518
• Parties: STATE v. MINTON.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

46 S.E.2d 296

228 N.C. 518

STATE v. MINTON.

No. 74.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

February 25, 1948

The defendant, Edward Minton, was tried upon a three-count bill of indictment charging him with perpetrating these offenses on January 26, 1946: (1) Breaking and entering the shop of the Coastal Lunch in Tarboro with intent to commit larceny therein contrary to G.S. § 14-54; (2) Larceny of 'two twenty-five cents pieces of the value of fifty cents' of the moneys of the Coastal Lunch; and (3) Receiving 'two twenty five cents pieces of the value of fifty cents' of the moneys of the Coastal Lunch with knowledge that the same had theretofore been feloniously stolen by another.

In its effort to sustain the charges against the accused, the State was compelled to rely entirely upon the circumstances set out below.

At the time named in the indictment, the State's witness Braddy was engaged in the retail sale of beer, sandwiches, and other articles at a shop known as the Coastal Lunch on North Main Street in Tarboro. Persons resorting to the Coastal Lunch for the purpose of trade entered the shop through a front door which was 'half glass and wood with the glass panel at the top and the wood at the bottom'. The defendant visited the Coastal Lunch during business hours on the night in question for the lawful object of buying beer. He consumed 'four or five beers' on the premises and tarried in the shop with other customers until closing time. Braddy shut the Coastal Lunch about 11:30 o'clock on the night in question and departed from the premises some twenty minutes later after securely locking the front door. At that time the accused and some nine or ten other persons were standing upon the sidewalk or street in front of the Coastal Lunch. Two 25 cent coins were left in the cash drawer in the shop.

At 7 o'clock on the following morning, it was discovered that the glass in the upper portion of the front door had been broken out, and that shattered glass was scattered over the floor of the shop. Blood was seen upon the jagged edge of a piece of broken glass sticking in the molding at the lower right-hand corner of the upper half of the door. Several finger-prints were observed upon a piece of glass lying upon the floor of the shop. This piece of glass was submitted to a finger-print expert for examination. The only legible finger-print thereon corresponded with the print of the left thumb of the defendant. It was determined by fitting pieces of broken glass together that this legible print had originally appeared upon the outside surface of the glass about 15 inches from the door knob, which was located on the right side of the door. The accused is right-handed. There was 'no way of knowing what time or when that fingerprint was put on the glass' or 'whose the other fingerprints were because they had been smeared. An inspection of the cash drawer in the shop disclosed that the two 25 cent pieces were missing.

A short time later police officers went to the home of the defendant situated several blocks from the Coastal Lunch. They found him in bed asleep, waked him, and accused him of having broken and entered the Coastal Lunch. The defendant immediately denied his guilt in the premises, stating that he had been a customer at the Coastal Lunch on the previous night, that he had returned to his home about midnight, and that he had been at home ever since. The officers observed one or more little cut places that 'looked to be fresh cuts' in the palm of the defendant's right hand, and found 'two quarters * * *, an English penny, a pack of smokes and a pack of gum' on the dresser in the defendant's bedroom. In response to questions asked by the officers, the accused stated that he had cut his right hand with a razor blade a short time before while making billfolds out of leather and that he had earned the money on the dresser by selling billfolds made by him.

The State also offered testimony tending to show that at some undisclosed time in the past the defendant had unlawfully broken and entered 'the White Cigar store' and stolen money therefrom. This evidence was admitted over the objection and exception of the defendant, who did not testify on the trial below.

Testimony was presented in behalf of the accused indicating that he was at home asleep when the breaking and entering of the Coastal Lunch occurred and when the coins were removed therefrom. The disposition of this appeal in this Court renders it...