State v. . Sloan
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Motion to quash, beard before Watts, J., at Fall Term, 1871, of Wake Superior Court. This was an indictment, against the defendant founded upon a-supposed violation of the 38th chapter of the acts of 1869-70. Such parts and sections of the .act as are material to the case are set out in the opinion of the Judge. The charges in the indictment are also stated in an abbreviated form in the opinion. There was a motion to quash.
Read the full summary
Motion to quash, beard before Watts, J., at Fall Term, 1871, of Wake Superior Court. This was an indictment, against the defendant founded upon a-supposed violation of the 38th chapter of the acts of 1869-70. Such parts and sections of the .act as are material to the case are set out in the opinion of the Judge. The charges in the indictment are also stated in an abbreviated form in the opinion. There was a motion to quash. The motion was sustained and the indictment quashed. The State appealed to the Supreme Court.
1Opinion of the CourtRodman, J.
We think there is no difficulty as to the rule, which Courts will in general observe, as to quashing indictments. If one be clearly defective, and would not support a conviction, the Court will quash it whether it be for a felony or for a less offence. Because in such a case it is useless to the State, and oppressive to the accused, to proceed to a trial which can amount to nothing. As by quashing, the recognizance of the prisoner is discharged, the Court, if the offence charged be a heinous one, and especially if there be danger that the prisoner will flee from justice, may in its discretion…
2Cited by11 opinions
- S. v. . WilkersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- State v. . HarbertSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
- State v. WilkersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- State v. . ChambersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
- State v. . WatkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1888
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.