State v. Price, 575
| Decision Date | 24 November 1965 |
| Docket Number | No. 575,575 |
| Citation | 265 N.C. 703,144 S.E.2d 865 |
| Parties | STATE of North Carolina v. Floyd Nelson PRICE. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
T. W. Bruton, Atty. Gen., Harrison Lewis, Deputy Atty. Gen., and William F. Briley, Trial Atty., Raleigh, for the State.
Knox Jenkins, Jr., Smithfield, for defendant appellant.
The bill of indictment in this case indicates that the solicitor set out to charge defendant with the crime of felonious assault as defined in G.S. § 14-32, yet he failed to incorporate in it the word feloniously. Therefore, as we have repeatedly held, the indictment does not charge a felony. State v. Lawrence, 264 N.C. 220, 141 S.E.2d 264; State v. Whaley, 262 N.C. 536, 138 S.E.2d 138. It does, however, specifically charge an assault wherein serious injury was inflicted. Although it would seem to come within the definition, State v. Cauley, 244 N.C. 701, 94 S.E.2d 915, it is not necessary to decide whether a burning paper bag, under the circumstances of its use here, constituted a deadly weapon. See also Commonwealth v. Farrell, 322 Mass. 606, 78 N.E.2d 697.
The jury having convicted defendant of a misdemeanor 'as charged,' and the court having sentenced defendant accordingly, no error appears upon the face of the record. The evidence was plenary to overcome defendant's motion for nonsuit, and his contention that Mavis O'Neal Cole was an incompetent witness because he had married her before the trial is without merit. G.S. § 8-57. Defendant's other assignments of error do not require discussion. They point out no error in the court's instructions to the jury. State v. Wilson, 263 N.C. 533, 139 S.E.2d 736. We have, however, carefully examined the entire charge, and we find no reasonable cause to believe that the jury was misled by it. Nothing in the transcript shows error prejudicial to the defendant--on the contrary!
We are constrained to say that the record in this case, as stipulated and agreed to by the solicitor and the attorney for defendant, and certified by the clerk, did not contain a true copy of the bill of indictment, nor did it show that the included bill had ever been returned by the grand jury. In this instance, we have secured from the Clerk of the Superior Court a properly authenticated and certified copy of the bill which shows that it was duly returned in the words and form appearing in the statement of facts. Obviously, officers of the General Court of Justice should not impose such a burden upon...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Garcia
...Government corporation" was fatally defective in failing to identify the premises with sufficient certainty); State v. Price, 265 N.C. 703, 704-05, 144 S.E.2d 865, 866-67 (1965) (holding that an indictment that does not incorporate the word "feloniously" or charge that the offense is a felo......
-
State v. Benton
...and to the court are no less than those of privately retained counsel. State v. Aycoth, 272 N.C. 48, 157 S.E.2d 655; State v. Price, 265 N.C. 703, 144 S.E.2d 865. Today, an unsucessful appeal in a criminal case--it matters not how skillfully and vigorously prosecuted or that the appeal may ......
-
State v. Hudson, 15
...rules of practice are applicable to indigent defendants and their court-appointed counsel as they are to all others. State v. Price, 265 N.C. 703, 144 S.E.2d 865.' State v. Jacobs, 278 N.C. 693, 180 S.E.2d 832 (1971). The question of defendant's constitutional right to counsel during in-cus......
-
State v. Douglas, 266
...Supreme Court of North Carolina apply to indigent defendants and their court-appointed counsel as well as to all other appellants. State v. Price, 265 N.C. 703, 144 N.E.2d 865. The purpose of Rule 19(3), which requires that each assignment of error itself disclose with particularity the spe......