State v. . Kirkman
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Indictment — “ Against the Peace and Dignity of the State.” Indictment for Incest, tried before Connor, J., at November Term, 1889, of Iredell Superior Court. The defendants were found guilty by a jury, and, on motion of their counsel, the judgment was arrested, on the ground that the usual concluding words, “ against the peace and dignity of the State,” were omitted from the indictment.
1Opinion of the Court
Clark, J.:
The conclusion, “ against the peace and dignity of the King,” was held in England to be necessary in all indictments. No reason was assigned for.it except that it had been customary. It furnished no light to the defendant, and its employment was not required by any statute. As every criminal offence is, in its nature, ‘'against the peace,” its use is tautology, and, doubtless, originated in the rhetorical flourish of some ancient and forgotten pleader.
In our Constitution of 1776 it was provided that indictments should conclude, “against the peace and dignity of the State,” but this…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State v. . JoynerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879
- State v. . ParkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879
- Hix v. . DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1873
- State v. . EvansSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1873
3Cited by13 opinions
- State v. CallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
- State v. . ArnoldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- State v. . PetersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- Shiver v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1899
- State v. . HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.