State v. Hatton Perry.
Citations
- 29 S.E. 384
- 122 N.C. 1018
- 1898 N.C. LEXIS 390
Syllabus
<p>Indictment for Rape — Appeal—New Trial — Res Judi-cata — Trial —Practice—Findings of Jury — •Grand Jurors■ — Minors— Verdict.</p> <p>1. While an affirmance of a judgment on appeal is necessarily an adjudication upon every assignment of error and of every matter which might have been urged in arrest of judgment, yet, where a new trial is granted, the judgment is res judicata only upon the errors ruled upon in the opinion though other errors were assigned on the appeal.</p> <p>2. Where two bills of indictment are found by a grand jury at the same term'and a prisoner is tried upon both and found guilty, the two bills constitute, in effect, counts in the same bill and if either is good it supports the verdict.</p> <p>3. The regulations contained in Sections 1722 and 1728 of The Code relative to the revision of the jury list are directory only and, while they should be observed, the failure to do so does not vitiate the venire in the absence of bad faith or corruption on the part of the County Commissioners.</p> <p>4. The competency of a grand juror depends upon his status at the time of service and not at the time when his name was put on the jury list; hence, the fact that a grand juror was a minor when his name was put on the jury list is immaterial if he was of age at the time he served.</p> <p>5. Where a grand juror was of age when he served as such in February, 1897, but reached his majority in September, 1896, the fact that he had not paid his taxes, for the preceding year, (1896) is no tenable objection to his competency to serve, since he could not have been liable for a poll tax and may not have had any property liable for taxation, and especially where it was found, as a fact, that no taxes were assessed against him for 1896. Besides, grand jurors are not required to be free-holders.</p> <p>6. The burden of showing a disqualification of a grand juror is upon the defendant.</p> <p>7. An indictment found by a grand jury of twelve men is good, provided all of
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- observing that the Legislature cannot interfere with the right of the State’s attorneys to exercise their exclusive powers to represent the State
- holding Legislature may not “obtrude other persons upon [the State attorneys] and compel the acceptance of their services”
- upholding the exclusive constitutional grant to the Attorney General to represent the Comptroller, as a state official
- upholding the exclusive constitutional grant to the Attorney General to represent the Comptroller, as a state official
- expressing that such a construction would be “condemned by the Constitution”
- upholding statute authorizing comptroller to contract with `suitable person' to collect inheritance taxes on theory that statute did not purport to deprive county attorney of his authority
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Clark
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.