Legal Opinion

State v. Marsh

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 20, 1903PublishedCited by 8 opinions

This was a MotioN by the State to restore this case to the docket and for a writ of certiorari herein.

1Opinion of the Court

ClaRic, O. J.

This case was before us at last term, State v. Marsh, 132 N. C., 1000: There were numerous exceptions, none of which were considered because a motion in arrest of judgment was made and allowed for the absence from the indictment (for rape), as sent up in the record, of the words ‘(against her will.” This objection was not taken below. It now appears by the inspection of the indictment by tire Judge below, and his finding of fact thereon, that those words were in fact in the indictment as found by the grand jury, and upon which the prisoner was tried, and were omitted by the Clerk…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Lovett v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1892
  2. Lovett v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1892
  3. State v. Marsh.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
  4. Cook v. . MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1888
  5. State v. CouncilSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1901

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Wolfe v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  2. State v. . HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1894
  3. Mechanical Sys. & Serv., Inc. v. Carolina Air Solutions, L.L.C.North Carolina Business Court · 2003
  4. Bernhardt v. . BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
  5. Biggs, Ex Parte.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1870

3 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