State v. Roberts

• Decision Date: 29 October 1924
• Docket Number: 348.
• Citation: State v. Roberts, 188 N.C. 460, 124 S.E. 833 (N.C. 1924)
• Parties: STATE v. ROBERTS ET AL.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

124 S.E. 833

188 N.C. 460

STATE v. ROBERTS ET AL.

No. 348.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

October 29, 1924

Appeal from Superior Court, Forsyth County; McElroy, Judge.

Fred Roberts and another were convicted of fornication and adultery, and named defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Admission of testimony for state after state has rested, or case closed, is within sound discretion of trial judge, and reviewed only in case of manifest abuse.

It appears that these defendants, charged in separate warrants were each found guilty of the offense by the municipal court and from judgments imposed appealed to superior court, and the causes having been there consolidated, were tried and determined, as stated, in the superior court.

There was evidence on the part of the state tending to show that in 1924, male defendant's wife having left his home defendant Clara Adams came to live at said home in response to an advertisement by male defendant for a housekeeper, etc., and was hired at the rate of $7.50 per week. There was evidence offered permitting the inference of guilt on the part of defendants while living in the house together.

The state having rested its case, there was motion for nonsuit by defendant Roberts. Overruled. Exception. Thereupon defendant Roberts offered no testimony, and again excepted on refusal of a second motion for nonsuit. Defendant Clara Adams then offered evidence tending to establish that she was at no time guilty of illicit relations with the male defendant, and herself testified to that effect. On cross-examination she further testified that during her stay with defendant as housekeeper, etc., he took her to Pittsburg, Pa., to see some of her relatives, and on the road they spent the night together in the automobile.

State then, over objection of defendant Roberts, was permitted to offer further evidence tending to show the guilt of the parties, and defendant Roberts excepted. There was verdict of guilty, judgment, and defendant Roberts appealed, assigning errors.

John C. Wallace and Raymond G. Parker, both of Winston-Salem, for appellant.

J. S. Manning, Atty. Gen., Frank Nash, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Swink, Clement & Hutchins, of Winston-Salem, for the State.

HOKE C.J.

The statute forbidding the offense (C. S. § 4343) closes with the provision "that the admissions or confessions of one shall not be received in evidence against the other," and it is insisted for appellant that on the trial this proviso was disregarded to his prejudice in allowing the state to introduce certain conduct and declarations of Clara Adams on the issue of appellant's guilt, as follows:

There was evidence tending to show that, while the defendants were living at the home of defendant Roberts, on one occasion the two went to a store in Winston-Salem where the wife was then employed and at work, and Clara Adams approached the wife and began to abuse her, saying that she, Clara Adams, was now Fred Roberts' second wife and she had papers to show it that she then and there assaulted Mrs. Roberts with great violence, grabbed her around the neck, jerked her to the floor, and kicked her in the breast and on the mouth, pulling out some of her hair, etc.; that when the...