State v. Thompson
| Citation | 10 N.C. 613 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina |
| Decision Date | 30 June 1825 |
| Parties | STATE v. THOMPSON. |
The Attorney-General has a discretionary power to enter a nolle prosequi, for the proper exercise of which he is responsible; the Court will not interfere unless the power be oppressively used. After entering a nol. pros., when a cause is called for trial, he may issue a capias returnable to the next term upon the same indictment.
THE defendant was indicted for permitting his negro slave to hire his own time, and when the cause was regularly called for trial before Norwood, J., at WAKE, the defendant was ready and urged for a trial. The Attorney-General directed a nolle prosequi to be entered in thecase without assigning any reason therefor; and after the nol. pros, was entered the Attorney-General moved for a capias against the defendant, returnable to the next term of this Court, which was refused by the court, whereupon the Attorney-General appealed.
It seems from the authorities cited that the Attorney-General has a discretionary power to enter a nolle prosequi, for the proper exercise of which he is responsible. We know of no case where the Court has interfered with the exercise of this power, though they certainly would do so if it were oppressively used. As to the directing another capias to issue, returnable to the next term, the authorities assert that such process may be awarded upon the same indictment. 6 Mod., 261; Com. Dig., "Indictment R."; 1 Chitty C. L., 480. We, there fore, think that it should have been directed in this case.
Reversed.
Cited: S. v. Thornton, 35 N. C., 258; S. v. Williams. 151 N. C., 661.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Commonwealth v. Dascalakis
...Attorney General v. Tufts, 239 Mass. 458, 538, 131 N. E. 573,132 N. E. 322,17 A. L. R. 274, and cases there collected; State v. Thompson, 10 N. C. 613. That power is limited, however, after a jury is impaneled. Then the defendant acquires a right to have that tribunal pass upon his guilt by......
-
State v. Furmage
...is that it is within the control of the court, but it is usually and properly left to the discretion of the Solicitor.' Also, see State v. Thompson, 10 N.C. 613; State v. Buchanan, 23 N.C. 59; State v. Conly, 130 N.C. 683, 41 S.E. 534; 27 C.J.S. District and Prosecuting Attorneys § The cont......
-
Klopfer v. State of North Carolina, 100
...early applications of the procedure were quite different from those of the period following enactment of § 15—175. Compare State v. Thompson, 10 N.C. 613 (1825), and State v. Thornton, 35 N.C. 256 (1852) (capias issued immediately after entry of the nolle prosequi with leave), with State v.......
-
State v. Lonon
...of a criminal charge may be set aside and the defendant prosecuted on the same indictment. [State v. Thornton, 35 N.C. 256; State v. Thompson, 10 N.C. 613.] In State Nutting, 39 Me. 359, a number of counts in an indictment were dismissed during the trial of the case and later, during the sa......