Cumberland County NcArchives Court.....Gilbert Evans, State V. 1873 ************************************************ 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 December 15, 2009, 7:17 pm Source: North Carolina Reports June Term Written: 1873 The State v. Gilbert Evans Where an indictment charged the larceny of a horse to have been committed at a certain time since the passage of the statute which prescribed the punishment of such a larceny, and the defendant was found guilty, judgment cannot be arrested upon the ground that prior to that time there had been several statutes prescribing different modes of punishment. It is no ground for the arrest of judgment that the indictment charged the offence to have been committed in the said "count," as it had caption, "Cumberland county," and the defendant was stated to be of that county. It is an informality which is saved by the Rev. Code ch. 35 sec. 14. This was an Indictment for larceny in stealing a horse. The caption of the indictment was as follows: "North Carolina, Cumberland county, Superior Court, Spring Term, 1873." It charged in the usual form that the defendant, late of the county of Cumberland, on the 1st day of February, 1873, in the count [sic] aforesaid, committed the act of stealing. The defendant pleaded not guilty, and after his trial and conviction moved in arrest of judgment. 1st. Because there had been several statutes which were passed in the years 1866, 1868, 1869 which prescribed different modes of punishment for horse stealing, and the indictment did not show under which statute the defendant was charged and convicted. The case of the State v. Wise, 66 NC Rep., 120, was relied upon in support of this ground of objection. 2d. Because it did not appear from the indictment that the offense alleged was committed in any county of the State. In support of this it was contended that the Court could not read the word "count" for county. Both objections were overruled by his Honor, Buxton, J., and the defendant was sentenced to confinement in the penitentiary for five years, and from the judgment he prayed and obtained an appeal to the Supreme Court. Hinsdale for the defendant Attorney General Hargrove for the State [NC Supreme Court] Reade, J. There is no error This will be certified, &c. Per Curiam Judgment affirmed [See court case for Judge Reade's complete findings] File at: http://files.usgwarchives.net/nc/cumberland/court/gilberte1266wl.txt This file has been created by a form at http://www.poppet.org/ncfiles/ File size: 2.7 Kb