State v. . Kearney
Supreme Court of North Carolina
From Warren. The prisoner had been convicted of manslaughter before Paxton, J. at April term, 1820, and, after praying the benefit of clergy, which was allowed him, he was sentenced by the Court to pay a fine of two hundred and fifty dollars, and receive thirty-nine lashes on his bare back, and stand committed until the fine and costs of prosecution were paid.
Read the full summary
From Warren. The prisoner had been convicted of manslaughter before Paxton, J. at April term, 1820, and, after praying the benefit of clergy, which was allowed him, he was sentenced by the Court to pay a fine of two hundred and fifty dollars, and receive thirty-nine lashes on his bare back, and stand committed until the fine and costs of prosecution were paid. The prisoner appealed from the sentence, upon the ground that the Court could not, in law, render such judgment. but the Reporter did not hear the argument.
1Opinion of the Court
Tayloíi, Chief-Justice,
afterwards delivered the opinio» of the Court:
The legality of the judgment in this case depends upon the construction of the act of Assembly 1816, c. 20; the object of which was to change the punishment of grand larceny and manslaughter. The former punishment was burning in the hand, a relick of ancient barbarism, of little effect in the way of reforming the culprit, or of example to the spectators. It seemed very absurd, too, that a person, convicted of petit larceny, should suffer whipping oh the bare back, when, if the property stolen was over the value of a…
2Cited by7 opinions
- State v. . HeathSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- State v. . MitchellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- State v. MitchellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- State v. . GriffisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1895
- State v. . TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1899
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.