State v. Witherspoon
| Decision Date | 30 June 1876 |
| Citation | 75 N.C. 222 |
| Parties | STATE v. W. H. WITHERSPOON. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Where Commissioners were appointed by an Act of the Legislature to lay off and establish a public read between certain points, and in obedience to said Act they did establish the road as contemplated, and reported their proceedings in the premises to the County Commissioners, who received and adopted their report, no one bound by said Act to work on the construction, or the opening of said road, can fail or refuse to do so, on account of the vagueness of said report; if he does so, he is liable to a criminal action for the penalty.
The time for the defendant to have objected to the report was when it was made to the County Commissioners and offered for acceptance by them.
( State v. James, 74 N. C. Rep., 393, cited and approved.)
This was a CRIMINAL ACTION, commencing in a Justice Court, and thence carried by appeal to the Superior Court of ASHE County, where it was tried by his Honor, Judge FURCHES, at Spring Term, 1876.
The following are the facts as contained in the statement of the case accompanying record:
The defendant was charged with having failed and refused to work on the construction of a public road, leading from Greer's Store, by Martin's Mills and Ore Knob, to intersect with the public road leading from Jefferson to Wilkesboro', by the way of Daniel's Gap, in the Blue Ridge, which was being constructed under the provisions of the Act of 1875, chap. 161.
Upon the trial, the report of the Commissioners appointed to lay out, stake and mark the said road was read, which report had been accepted and adopted by the County Commissioners. The defendant's counsel suggested that the said report was too indefinite and uncertain, and was not a sufficient compliance with the Act of Assembly, and the law to locate and establish such a road as would make the defendant liable to this action for not working on the same. This was denied by the State, and intimated, that if the Court should agree with the defendant in this opinion, the State would like to have the opinion of the Court reviewed.
His Honor reserved the opinion of the Court as to sufficiency of the report of the Commissioners, and gave the case to the jury, who found, upon the fact admitted, that the defendant was guilty. The defendant's counsel moved that the verdict be set aside, and the defendant go without day, &c. His Honor, upon consideration of the question reserved, allowed...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Adams
...trial court that the proof adduced on the hearing supports the present prosecution. State v. Joyce, 121 N.C. 610, 28 S.E. 366; State v. Witherspoon, 75 N.C. 222. In first place, a prima facie presumption of rightful jurisdiction arises from the fact that a court of general jurisdiction has ......
-
State v. Adams
...that the proof adduced on the hearing supports the present prosecution. State v. Joyce, 121 N.C 610, 28 S.E. 366; State v. Witherspoon, 75 N.C. 222. In the first place, a prima facie presumption of rightful jurisdiction arises from the fact that a court of general jurisdiction has acted in ......
-
State v. Yoder
...final, unless reversed on appeal, and any person affected could appeal. The order cannot be collaterally impeached. State v. Witherspoon, 75 N. C. 222; State v. Smith. 100 N. C. 550, 6 S. E. 251; State v. Joyce, 121 N. C. 610, 28 S. E. 366. In this last case, at page 611, 121 N. C, page 366......
-
State v. Yoder
... ... M. Yoder was convicted of failing and refusing to work on a ... highway, and appeals. Affirmed ... Douglas ... and Connor, JJ., dissenting ... S. J ... Ervin, Self & Whitney, and E. B. Cline, for appellant ... L. L ... Witherspoon and the Attorney General, for the State ... CLARK, ... C.J. (after stating the facts) ... The ... motion to quash was properly denied. The affidavit contains ... every allegation necessary ... [44 S.E. 690] ... in a proceeding to enforce a penalty for ... ...