State v. . Jones
Supreme Court of North Carolina
IndictmeNT for larceny tried at Fall Term, 1884, of Gkeene Superior Court, before Avery, J. There was no exception to the ruling of thejudge upon the trial, and none to his charge to the jury.
Read the full summary
IndictmeNT for larceny tried at Fall Term, 1884, of Gkeene Superior Court, before Avery, J. There was no exception to the ruling of thejudge upon the trial, and none to his charge to the jury. The jury returned a verdict of guilty, the defendant being present, but he did not suggest that his counsel was then absent, or ask that he be sent for ; and on the day after the verdict was so returned the defendant moved for a new trial upon the grounds set forth in an affidavit to the effect, in substance, as follows : That the attorney employed to conduct his defence was necessarily absent from the…
1Opinion of the CourtMerrimon, J.
The defendant was present in court at the time the jury rendered their verdict. He did not suggest to the court that his counsel was then absent, nor did he ask that he be sent for.
It was not essential to the validity of the verdict that the jury be polled. It was perfectly competent for the court to receive and enter the verdict in the absence of counsel, the defendant being present. A verdict thus rendered, was neither void nor irregular. It was in all respects regular, and hence, it lay entirely in the discretion of the court to determine whether or not for such cause, it would set the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. . PaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1883
3Cited by7 opinions
- Horne v. . SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- State v. . AustinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
- State v. . BestSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892
- Tartar v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1938
- Barger Bros. v. AlleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.