Craven County NcArchives Court.....Edward Dozier, State V. 1875
************************************************
Copyright.  All rights reserved.
http://www.usgwarchives.net/copyright.htm
http://www.usgwarchives.net/nc/ncfiles.htm
************************************************

File contributed for use in USGenWeb Archives by:
Connie Ardrey n/a October 29, 2011, 12:04 pm

Source: Nc Reports
Written: 1875

State v. Edward Dozier

Breaking and entering a store-house, with an intent to steal the goods, &c., 
therein, is not a criminal offence at common law; and there is no statute in 
this State making such act a crime.

Indictment for breaking, &c., a store house, with intent to steal therefrom, 
tried in Craven County at Fall Term, 1874, of the Superior Court, before his 
Honor, Judge Seymour.

The defendant was convicted on the following indictment, to-wit:

"The jurors," &c., "present, that Edward Dozier, late of Craven County, on the 
20th day of September, A.D. 1874, with force and arms, at and in said county, 
about the hour of 10 o'clock in the night time of the same day, the store 
house of Washington Spivey, there situate, unlawfully and wickedly did break, 
with an intent to steal, the same store house to enter and the goods and 
chattels of the said Washington Spivey, in the said store house then and there 
being, then and there feloniously to steal, take and carry away, contrary to 
law, and against the peace and dignity of the State."

Being convicted, the defendant moved in arrest of judgment, upon the ground 
that the indictment was insufficient in law:

1. Because no such offence as "an intent to steal" is known to the common, or 
our statute law.

2. That the breaking in the store house was a distinct act from his conduct 
after he had entered; and hence no inference could be drawn from that act as 
to his intentions after he had entered.

3. That there is a difference between an intent to do a thing and an attempt: 
Hence, if the defendant had attempted to steal after he had broken in, and had 
been prevented from so doing by the owner of the store house, he would have 
been guilty at common law. But as he made no such attempt to steal, it was 
submitted, that the indictment charged no offence known to our law.

His Honor refusing the motion the defendant appealed.

Stevenson, for the defendant
Hargrove, Attorney General, for the State

NC Supreme Court Justice Bynum, J. - The defendant is indicted for breaking 
and entering the store house of Washington Spivey, with the intent to steal 
good and chattels of the said Spivey therein; and the indictment concludes at 
common law.

Whether an obvious defect in the law, should not be supplied by some similar 
statute in this State, is a matter for the consideration of the Legislature.

There is error
Per Curiam
Judgment reversed

Additional Comments:
In the NC Supreme Court June Term 1875

File at: http://files.usgwarchives.net/nc/craven/court/edwarddo2951wl.txt

This file has been created by a form at http://www.poppet.org/ncfiles/

File size: 3.0 Kb