State v. Sparrow

Decision Date02 May 1956
Docket NumberNo. 295,295
Citation244 N.C. 81,92 S.E.2d 448
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesSTATE, v. I. J. SPARROW, Jr.

LaRoque & Allen, Kinston, and Edmundson & Edmundson, Goldsboro, for defendant, appellant.

Atty. Gen. William B. Rodman, Jr., and Asst. Atty. Gen. Harry W. McGalliard for the State.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant's only assignment of error is that the trial judge, in charging the jury, 'failed to give equal stress to the contentions of the defendant as required by G.S. § 1-180.'

Careful study of the evidence and of the charge convinces us that the trial judge sufficiently and fairly reviewed the contentions of defendant. In relation to the facts in evidence, it was natural and reasonable that the review of the State's contentions should take somewhat longer than the review of defendant's contentions. The State's principal witnesses testified in detail as to their transactions with defendant. Defendant's evidence was that he did not know these men and had had no transactions with them. Hence, defendant offered no evidence in respect of the details of any of the transactions concerning which these witnesses had testified.

The assignment of error is without merit. Hence, the verdict and judgment must stand.

No error.

JOHNSON, J., not sitting.

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • State v. Smith
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • 2 de junho de 1982
    ...of time. State v. Banks, 295 N.C. 399, 245 S.E.2d 743 (1978); State v. King, 256 N.C. 236, 123 S.E.2d 486 (1962); State v. Sparrow, 244 N.C. 81, 92 S.E.2d 448 (1956). In the case at bar, defendant did not offer independent evidence at the guilt phase, he only elicited minor evidence upon cr......
  • State v. Maynard
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • 10 de janeiro de 1958
    ...Defendants' assignments of error grouped under this question are overruled. State v. Adams, 245 N.C. 344, 95 S.E.2d 902; State v. Sparrow, 244 N.C. 81, 92 S.E.2d 448. The third question that the defendants present for decision is that the court failed to declare and explain the law arising ......
  • State v. Adams
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • 11 de janeiro de 1957
    ...omitted or incorrectly stated. State v. DeMai, 227 N.C. 657, 44 S.E.2d 218; State v. Smith, 238 N.C. 82, 76 S.E.2d 363; State v. Sparrow, 244 N.C. 81, 92 S.E.2d 448. A careful study of the evidence and the charge leads us to the conclusion that the trial judge sufficiently and fairly review......
  • State v. Thompson
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 3 de fevereiro de 1981
    ...not object, however, if the court takes more time in stating the State's contentions than in stating the defendant's, State v. Sparrow, 244 N.C. 81, 92 S.E.2d 448, (1956); and the equal stress required "does not mean that the statement of contentions of the State and of the defendant must b......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT