State v. Moschoures
| Citation | 214 N.C. 321,199 S.E. 92 |
| Decision Date | 19 October 1938 |
| Docket Number | No. 15.,15. |
| Parties | STATE. v. MOSCHOURES. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina |
Appeal from Superior Court, Buncombe County; Felix E. Alley, Judge.
Chris Moschoures plead guilty to possessing and selling intoxicating liquors, and from the judgment imposing sentence he appeals.
Affirmed.
Worth McKinney and T. O. Pangle, both of Asheville, for appellant.
Harry McMullan, Atty. Gen., and T. W. Bruton and Robert H. Wettach, Asst. Attys. Gen., for the State.
The defendant entered a general plea of guilty, and on the first count in the warrant his Honor imposed sentence of imprisonment for 18 months to be assigned to labor under the supervision and control of the State Highway & Public Works Commission, and on the second count a similar sentence, commencing at the expiration of the sentence on the first count, suspended for five years upon condition that the defendant does not violate the criminal laws of the State.
To the judgment entered the defendant reserved exception and appealed, contending that the warrant charged but one offense and supported but one sentence. With this contention we cannot concur. The affidavit upon which the warrant was predicated reads as follows: "T. K. Brown, being duly sworn, complains and says, that at and in said County, on, or about the 4th day of December, 1937, Chris Moschoures did unlawfully, wilfully and feloniously have and keep in his possession for the purpose of sale or barter a quantity of intoxicating whiskey. 2nd Count--Chris Moschoures on said date at and in said county, did unlawfully, wilfully barter, sell, give away, furnish, deliver, exchange and otherwise dispose of intoxicating liquors, contrary to the form of the statute, and against the peace and dignity of the State." The first count clearly contains a charge of unlawful possession of intoxicating liquors for the purpose of sale and the second count a charge of unlawful sale of intoxicating liquors. C.S.Supp.1924, § 3411(b). These are distinct charges of separate offenses, and support the separate sentences imposed.
Defendant also contends that the sentences inflicted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of Article 1, Sec. 14, of the Constitution of North Carolina, with which contention we likewise cannot concur. "It is equally well settled that, when no time is fixed by the statute, this court will not hold imprisonment for two years cruel and unusual." State v. Farrington, 141 N.C. 844, 53 S.E. 954; State v. Daniels, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Calcutt
...different counts in the bill may stand as separate and distinct offenses, and separate judgments may be entered thereon. State v. Moschoures, 214 N.C. 321, 199 S.E. 92; State v. Malpass, 189 N.C. 349, 127 S.E. State v. Jarrett, 189 N.C. 516, 127 S.E. 590. No sufficient reason has been made ......
-
State v. Williams
...cited several decisions involving analogous situations with respect to possession and sale of nontax-paid liquor; State v. Moschoures, 214 N.C. 321, 199 S.E. 92 (Sup.Ct.1938); State v. Chavis, 232 N.C. 83, 59 S.E.2d 348 (Sup.Ct.1950); State v. Stonestreet, 243 N.C. 28, 89 S.E.2d 734 (Sup.Ct......
-
State v. Cameron
...This is a difference totally without distinction for the purpose of analyzing the question presented in this case. In State v. Moschoures, 214 N.C. 321, 199 S.E. 92 (1938), the defendant was charged in two counts in a bill of indictment with unlawful possession of liquor for the purpose of ......
-
State v. Crandall
...not be held to be cruel and unusual, and violative of Article I, Section 14 of the Constitution of North Carolina. See State v. Moschoures, 214 N.C. 321, 199 S.E. 92, citing State v. Farrington, 141 N.C. 844, 53 954; State v. Daniels, 197 N.C. 285, 148 S.E. 244, and cases there cited. As to......