State v. . Isham
Supreme Court of North Carolina
~i V From New-IIanover. J The Prisoner was indicted for grand larceny, found guilty and prayed the benefit of clergy; to the prayer of clergy, the State, by its Solicitor, objected, on the ground that the Prisoner had, before, been allowed his clergy, on a conviction of grand larceny in Duplin county, and produced a paper purporting to be a transcript of the proceedings on the trial in Duplin, the certificate bn which stated it to be a true copy from the records, “ given…
Read the full summary
~i V From New-IIanover. J The Prisoner was indicted for grand larceny, found guilty and prayed the benefit of clergy; to the prayer of clergy, the State, by its Solicitor, objected, on the ground that the Prisoner had, before, been allowed his clergy, on a conviction of grand larceny in Duplin county, and produced a paper purporting to be a transcript of the proceedings on the trial in Duplin, the certificate bn which stated it to be a true copy from the records, “ given under my hand and sea!,” and signed with the Clerk’s name; the seal attached to this record was so indistinct and faint in…
1Opinion
The question to be tried on the issue joined on the plea of nultiel record is as much a question of fact as that arising on any other issue. It is true the court tries it, and not the jury, but that does not change it to a question of law. Questions of law may (187) arise on the admissibility of the evidence, and these questions this Court can reexamine, but not the evidence itself. The case states that the record was certified under hand and seal of the clerk, without any reference to the seal of the court, and there was on paper something like the seal of the court, and probably was…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. . GreenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1888
- State v. . WorleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1850
- Fain v. . EdwardsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1852