Legal Opinion

State v. . Martin

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 15, 1916PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Mo.tioN to reinstate appeal.

1Opinion of the CourtCiaek, C. J.

This appeal was taken in forma pauperis from Cline, J. On motion of the State, the appeal was dismissed because the affidavit for leave to appeal without giving bond did not state, as required by Revisal 3278, that “the application is in good faith.” It has been repeatedly held that an order permitting such appeal in a criminal ease is fatally defective if the affidavit does not comply with the statute, because the requirement is jurisdictional, and unless the affidavit is sufficient the appeal must be dismissed as a “matter of right, and not of discretion.” S. v. Bramble, 121 N. C., 603,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Pepper v. Clegg.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
  2. Hamlin v. . TuckerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1875
  3. State v. Atkinson.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  4. S. v. . BrambleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
  5. State v. . DevaneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. . StaffordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
  2. Powell v. . MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  3. State v. . MarionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  4. State v. . BrumfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  5. State v. . MitchellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API