State v. Malpass
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtVarser, J.
The defendant complained because the trial court consolidated the two cases and tried them together, as upon one bill of indictment with two counts. In this order we can perceive no error whatever. It was not only proper to consolidate these cases and try them together, instead of “taking two bites at the cherry,” but it would appear that C. S., 4622, makes it the duty of the trial court so to do.
Both offenses charged are of the same grade, being misdemeanors, and the punishment for each is the same. When this is the case, the right to join the counts in one warrant of indictment has always…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Blitz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- State v. . TooleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- United States v. PattersonUnited States Circuit Court · 1887
- State v. . DriverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1878
- State v. . NashSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1882
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- State v. HamiltonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- State v. BirckheadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
- State v. GibsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- State v. BryantSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
- State v. BoydSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.