State v. Rountree

• Decision Date: 06 April 1921
• Docket Number: 273.
• Citation: 106 S.E. 669,181 N.C. 535
• Parties: STATE v. ROUNTREE.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

106 S.E. 669

181 N.C. 535

STATE v. ROUNTREE.

No. 273.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

April 6, 1921

Appeal from Superior Court, Cumberland County; Horton, Judge.

David Rountree was convicted of involuntary manslaughter, and appeals. No error.

In a prosecution for manslaughter, held, that the court properly submitted the case to the jury.

Criminal prosecution, tried upon an indictment charging the defendant with manslaughter.

There was evidence on behalf of the state tending to show that on Sunday, April 25, 1920, about 6 p. m., James A. King was struck by an automobile and injured to such an extent that he died within three or four hours thereafter. At the time of the injury the deceased was on the north side of Hillsboro street extended, near a sharp turn or curve in the road about one mile north of the corporate limits of the city of Fayetteville. It is mentioned in the record as the Hillsboro street road; and along this thoroughfare the defendant was driving his Ford car when he struck the deceased. The only eyewitnesses to the occurrence were the defendant, his wife and two colored women who were riding in the machine when the injury occurred. None of these parties, however, gave any evidence in the case.

H. G Bullock testified that he saw the deceased a few minutes after the injury; that Mr. King was lying on the north side of the street, just beyond the curbing in the road; that he was flat on his back and appeared to be unconscious, and that his left leg was broken; that David Rountree, his wife, and some colored women were there when he arrived; that the defendant was holding Mr. King's head up, and asked one of the colored women for something to put under his head, and she went into a house and got a pillow; that the defendant said he was driving the car that hit the deceased. Continuing, the witness stated:

"The car was 6, 8, or 10 feet ahead of where the injured man was lying. The two left-hand wheels were in the road and the two right-hand wheels were just across the waterway or berm ditch outside of the road. The used part of the road was a little to the south side near the inside bend. Mr. King's body was on the opposite side. The road at that point is straight, but soon turns at almost a right angle and was built for a width of 31 feet. It was a new clay road and had not been used a great while. Where the car was, it was moderately hard. I did not notice the track of the car particularly. It was headed westward. The view was unobstructed. I asked some one to phone for a doctor, but as Mr. Patterson drove up I sent Mr. King to the hospital in his automobile. I do not remember that the defendant said anything about how the deceased was traveling when the car struck him. The defendant was crying before we left."

Lacy Patterson testified:

"When we got there Mr. King was lying back of a Ford car about 4 or 5 feet, with his head on a pillow. His feet were down in a gutter, or waterway, and his head was pointed southward. I observed the track of the car. It left the center of the road that would be traveled by a car or buggy 35 or 40 yards off and came straight until it stopped. It showed there were several kinds of tires on the car, and I could trace it by that. When I saw the car the left-hand side was 12 or 15 feet from the beaten track or ruts of the road ordinarily taken by a car. Mr. King's body was right over in the gutter and his feet were down in it. Where his feet were I would say is about 15 or 18 feet from the beaten track. The width of the road at that point was about 20 feet. Over there on the right side of the road where the wheels were standing there was an onion patch; it was cultivated. After carrying Uncle Jim to the hospital I came back and put down some pegs, from which the measurements were taken when they made a map of it. The deceased made no statement as to how the occurrence happened. About two inches of the bone could be seen protruding through his pants where his leg was broken." Leslie Smith testified that he was a civil engineer, and that he made a survey and map of the place where the deceased was injured and measured the distances on the road as pointed out by Lacy Patterson. The defendant's car left the center of the road at a point 274 feet west of the Linden road. From this point to where Mr. King's body was found it is 78 feet, and 93.5 feet to where the car stopped, which was 15 1/2 feet from the point where the body was found. The width of the road where the car left the center of the track was 28 feet. The road was hard clay surface, but 10 feet from the center of the road the soil is sand. The tracks were visible four days afterwards and it had rained in the meantime. From the south side of the road to where Mr. Patterson said the body was found was about 31 feet. The direction of this road from the Linden road is almost due west, with an open view all the way.

(Image Omitted)

The defendant offered no evidence, but moved to dismiss the action, or for judgment as of nonsuit under the Mason Act (chapter 73, Public Laws 1913). Motion overruled, and defendant excepted.

The jury returned a verdict adverse to the defendant, finding him guilty of involuntary manslaughter. From the judgment pronounced thereon, the defendant appealed.

H. L. Brothers and Bullard & Stringfield, all of Fayetteville, for appellant.

J. S. Manning, Atty. Gen., and Frank Nash, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

STACY J.

We have not stated all the...