Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1946

State v. . Beasley

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Decided October 9, 1946 · PER CURIAM.

39 S.E.2d 607; 226 N.C. 580; 1946 N.C. LEXIS 279 (South Eastern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

7 later published cases cite this decision.

Winesett v. Scheidt (N.C. 1954)
State v. Cooper (N.C. 1953)
State v. Norman (N.C. 1969)
State v. Norman (N.C. Ct. App. 1969)
State v. Sellers (N.C. 1968)
State v. Thomas (N.C. 1952)
State Ex Rel. Clark v. Adams (W. Va. 1959)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The defendant seeks to contend that the evidence offered, after plea, to acquaint the court with the nature of the offense fails to establish any crime, and therefore he ought to be discharged. The position is untenable. The guilt of the accused was not at issue, and the solicitor was not undertaking to make out a case. The defend *581 ant’s plea relieved the prosecution of this burden. S. v. Burnett, 174 N. C., 796, 93 S. E., 473.

Similar questions are being resolved against tbe defendants in S. v. Beasley, ante, 577, and S. v. Ayers, ante, 579, herewith decided. Hence, the subject judgment will be affirmed on authority of these cases.

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.