State v. . Chancy
Supreme Court of North Carolina
INDICTMENT, for fornication and adultery, tried before Mclver, /., at Fall Term, 1891, of Bladen Superior Court. There was a verdict of guilty, and from a judgment imposing a fine of five hundred dollars and costs on the male defendant, he appealed. The other facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Shepherd, J.:
The duty which the law imposes upon the Judges of deciding whether there is any evidence to be submitted to the jury, is one of much delicacy and importance, and its proper performance is often attended with grave doubt and embarrassing difficulty.
The line which divides the province of the Court and jury in this respect is not easily defined, although several attempts in that direction have been made by this Court. Thus, in State v. Allen (3 Jones, 257), it is intimated that a mere scintilla of evidence should be submitted to the jury, while in the case of Wittkowsky v. Wasson,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Wittkowsky v. WassonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1874
- State v. . WhiteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1883
- State v. . PowellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1886
- State v. . EliasonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884
- Best v. . FrederickSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1881
3Cited by15 opinions
- State v. McClainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
- Spruill v. Northwestern Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
- Powell v. StricklandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Powell v. . StricklandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- State v. WisemanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.