Legal Opinion

State v. Dickens

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 22, 1939PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDeviN, J.

The statute, C. S., 4483, makes it unlawful to “willfully injure . . . needlessly mutilate or kill . . . any useful beast or animal.” The willful killing of a dog is embraced within the prohibition of the statute. S. v. Smith, 156 N. C., 628, 72 S. E., 321; S. v. Clifton, 152 N. C., 800, 67 S. E., 751.

The manner and circumstances of the killing of the dog as disclosed by the evidence were not controverted. The defendant did not go upon the stand. The testimony showed that the defendant intentionally and without cause shot and killed a dog — a valuable pointer — the property of the prosecuting…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Foster v. . HymanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
  2. State v. . DixonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1876
  3. State v. . RileySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
  4. State v. . VinesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
  5. State v. . WoolardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. HalesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  2. In Re Adoption of HooseSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  3. State v. FowlerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974
  4. State v. TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  5. State v. CharlesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2022

4 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