State v. . Younger
Supreme Court of North Carolina
From Rutherford. The Defendants were tried before his honor Judge Norwood, upon the following indictment: “ The Jurors for the State upon their oath present, that William Gr.
Read the full summary
From Rutherford. The Defendants were tried before his honor Judge Norwood, upon the following indictment: “ The Jurors for the State upon their oath present, that William Gr. Younger and Richard I. Cook, on, &c. at, &c. did combine, conspire, confederate and agree, to and with each other, to cheat and defraud one P. D. out of his goods and chattels, and in pursuance of the aforesaid agreement, so as aforesaid between them had and made, the said W. G. Y. and R. I. C. did, at, &c. cause and procure the said P. D- to be intoxicated, and did then and there propose to him, the said P. t>. to play…
1Opinion of the Court
Tayxor, Chief-Justice
It is to be decided in this case, whether the facts set forth in the indictment, and which áre affirmed by the finding of the Jury, constitute an indictable offence at common law. The charge in substance, is, that the Defendants conspired together to defraud and cheat the prosecutor out of his goods ; and to accomplish that end, they procured him to be intoxicated, and engaged him to play at cards, when they fraudulently cheated him out of three hundred dollars. Conspiracy was anciently confined to imposing by combination a false crime upon any person, or conspiring to…
2Cited by13 opinions
- State v. Van PeltSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- State v. WilsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
- State v. . RitterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
- State v. . WrennSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- State v. ParkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.