Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1950

State v. Sumner

State v. Sumner
Supreme Court of North Carolina · Decided September 20, 1950 · Barnhill
61 S.E.2d 84; 232 N.C. 386; 1950 N.C. LEXIS 526 (South Eastern Reporter, Second Series)

State v. Sumner

Opinion

BabNHIll, J.

Defendant moved in this Court that the judgment pronounced be arrested. The motion must be denied. While the criminal charge contained in the warrant might have been more precisely stated, it is sufficient, as alleged, to sustain the judgment and bar another prosecution for the same offense. G.S. 15-153. It is sufficiently intelligible and explicit to (1) inform the defendant of the charge he must answer, (2) enable him to prepare his defense, and (3) sustain the judgment. This is all that is required. S. v. Shade, 115 N.C. 757; S. v. Ratliff, 170 N.C. 707, 86 S.E. 997; S. v. Francis, 157 N.C. 612, 72 S.E. 1041; S. v. Morgan, 226 N.C. 414, 38 S.E. 2d 166; 15 A.J. 98.

It is now unlawful to operate a motor vehicle upon a public highway in this State at a rate of speed in excess of 55 miles per hour. G.S. 20-141 (b) (4). To do so constitutes a misdemeanor. G.S. 20-141 (j); G.S. 20-180. That this was the charge against him was well understood by defendant.

The exceptive assignments of error discussed in defendant’s brief are without substantial merit. They cannot be sustained.

In the trial below we find

No error.

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