State v. Reddick
Decision Date | 08 January 1943 |
Docket Number | 721. |
Citation | 23 S.E.2d 909,222 N.C. 520 |
Parties | STATE v. REDDICK. |
Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
The defendant was tried and convicted upon a bill of indictment charging that on the 27th day of May, 1942, he did unlawfully, wilfully and feloniously receive stolen goods, to wit: automobile tires of the value of $393, the property of W.D. Holt and others, knowing at the time he received the same they had been feloniously stolen.
Upon a jury verdict of guilty as charged, judgment of imprisonment in the State's prison for a term of three years was pronounced, from which judgment the defendant appealed assigning errors.
Fred Folger, of Mount Airy, and Jones & Brassfield, of Raleigh, for defendant-appellant.
Harry McMullan, Atty. Gen., and George B. Patton and Hughes J Rhodes, Asst. Attys. Gen., for the State.
The first two exceptions set out in the appellant's brief are Exception No. 1 to the refusal of the court to set aside the verdict, and Exception No. 2 to the judgment of the court. The motion to set aside the verdict was addressed to the sound discretion of the judge and a refusal to grant it is not reviewable. State v. Wagstaff, 219 N.C. 15, 12 S.E.2d 657. The exception to the judgment is untenable since the judgment is well within the provision of the statute C.S. § 4250; State v. Daniels, 197 N.C. 285, 148 S.E. 244, and cases there cited.
The third exception set out in the appellant's brief is Exception No. 8, which is lodged to the following excerpt from the charge of the court: .
In the early part of the charge the court gave a proper instruction as to "character evidence", how it should be considered in the dual capacity of evidence in corroboration of the defendant's testimony and evidence of a substantive nature bearing upon the defendant's guilt or innocence. His Honor's words were:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial