Legal Opinion

State v. . Hooker

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 20, 1923PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Pee Cubiam.

The plea in abatement was too late after the plea of not guilty; S. v. Oliver, ante, 329. The presumption of law is that the violation of law is presumed to take place where the indictment alleges. If it took place elsewhere the burden is upon the defendant to show that it took place in another county. S. v. Oliver, supra.

The court overruled the plea as to venue upon the ground that it was too late after the plea of not guilty was entered, but out of abundant caution submitted the following issue, “Did the alleged abandonment take place in Anson County?” to which the jury responded…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. . BeamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  2. State v. . HannonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  3. State v. . DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1878

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. . RitterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  2. State v. . CarsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
  3. State v. LucasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  4. Peeler v. . PeelerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
  5. Bradley v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1935

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API