State v. . Conrad
Supreme Court of North Carolina
The defendant was tried and convicted for larceny, at Spring Term, 1886, of RICHMOND Superior Court, before Boykin, Judge, and from the judgment pronounced against him he appealed.
Read the full summary
The defendant was tried and convicted for larceny, at Spring Term, 1886, of RICHMOND Superior Court, before Boykin, Judge, and from the judgment pronounced against him he appealed. The State proposed to prove that when the prisoner was brought before the Justice of the Peace for the preliminary investigation, the Justice asked her if she was ready for trial, to which she replied that she was not, because of the absence of certain witnesses by whom she expected to prove that the watch, for the larceny of which she was indicted, had been given to her by one Wright. The State had previously…
1Opinion of the CourtMerkmoN, J.
It is very clear, that generally, the State may prove the pertinent voluntary declaration of the defendant in respect to the corpus of the offence charged in the indictment. And such declarations were competent evidence against the defendant although made to or in the presence of the officer who arrested her at the time the arrest was made, or while she was in his custody. Indeed, her declarations thus made to any person were competent against her unless they were made before the magistrate on the preliminary examination, in respect to the offence with which she was- charged, and he failed,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. Martha Matthews.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1872
- State v. . RorieSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1876
- State v. . SpierSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1882
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. . GrierSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
- State v. . DixonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- Giles v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1947