Legal Opinion

State v. . Ellar

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided July 5, 1827PublishedCited by 2 opinions

From Ashe. The indictment charged, that the Defendant being an evil disposed person, “ did, in the public street of Jefferson, profanely curse and swear, and take the name of God in vain, to the evil example, &c. and to the common nuisance of the good citizens of the State.” After a verdict for the State, the Counsel for the Defendant moved in arrest of judgment, upon the ground that the offence was not indictable.

Read the full summary

From Ashe. The indictment charged, that the Defendant being an evil disposed person, “ did, in the public street of Jefferson, profanely curse and swear, and take the name of God in vain, to the evil example, &c. and to the common nuisance of the good citizens of the State.” After a verdict for the State, the Counsel for the Defendant moved in arrest of judgment, upon the ground that the offence was not indictable. His honor Judge Strange sustained the motion, and judgment being arrested, the Solicitor appealed.

1Opinion of the Court

Taylor, Chief-Justice.

It was held, in the case of the State v. Waller, that if the offence with which the Defendant then stood charged, had been laid as a common nuisance, and the Jury had so found it, thejudg- ffipnf would have been supported. Drunkenness and profane swearing are placed on the same footing by the act of 1741, c. SO, and where committed in single acts, may be punished summarily by a Justice of the Peace. But where the acts are repeated, and so public as to become an annoyance and inconvenience to the citizens at targe, no reason is perceived why they are not indictable as…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. . DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1900
  2. State v. . WallerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1819

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API