State v. . Hart
Supreme Court of North Carolina
INDICTMENT for burning a barn, tried before Brown, J., and a jury, at Eall Term, 1894, of Oka ven Superior Court. The defendant was convicted and appealed. Such facts as are necessary to an understanding of the opinion are stated in the opinion of Associate Justice Fubches.
1Opinion of the Court
FurChes, J. :
The defendant having been convicted, moves for a new trial and assigns two grounds for his motion. First, that the Court did not charge the jury as requested, and Secondly, that the Court did not recapitulate the evidence to the jury. And these motions being denied, he then moved in arrest of judgment, upon the ground that the bill of indictment was defective.
Defendant’s motion for a new trial cannot be sustained upon the first cause assigned for more than one reason. First, Upon examination of the record we fail to find any prayers or request for instructions, and therefore…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. . KigerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1894
- State v. . ThorneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879
- State v. . SimonsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1874
3Cited by27 opinions
- State v. . RountreeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
- State v. . SigmonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- State v. WilsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
- State v. Burnett.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- State v. . CarlsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.