State v. . Owenby
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.
Tbe sufficiency of tbe indictment is challenged, both by motion to quash tbe bill and by motion in arrest of judgment. But as a new trial is to be bad for reasons hereafter stated, tbe solicitor can easily eliminate any objection by sending a new bill to tbe grand jury. It is always better in criminal matters to adhere to the established practice and to follow tbe beaten path. S. v. Johnson, ante, 266.
Tbe disparagement of tbe defendant’s witness, Cody, and tbe expression of opinion tbat tbe minor in tbe case was not a delinquent, though inadvertently made in tbe presence of tbe jury, would…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Withers v. . LaneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
- State v. . HartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
- State v. . OwnbySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
- State v. . RhinehartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Morris v. Kramer Bros.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- State v. PerrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
- State v. FrazierSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- State v. SimpsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- State v. AtkinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- State v. GibsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.