Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1954

State v. Scott

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Decided November 24, 1954 · Barnhill

84 S.E.2d 654; 241 N.C. 178; 1954 N.C. LEXIS 567 (South Eastern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

12 later published cases cite this decision.

State v. Bissette (N.C. 1959)
State v. Walker (N.C. 1958)
State v. Cox (N.C. 1956)
State v. Barnes (N.C. 1961)
State v. Russell (N.C. 1972)
State v. Stokes (N.C. 1968)
State v. Stokes (N.C. 1968)
State v. Smith (N.C. 1964)
State v. Eason (N.C. 1955)
State v. Harvey (N.C. 1955)
State v. Faulkner (N.C. 1955)
State v. Hammonds (N.C. 1954)

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

Barnhill, C. J.

The bill of indictment fails to meet the test set forth in S. v. Sumner, 232 N.C. 386, 61 S.E. 2d 84, and other decisions of like *179 import. Tbe allegations in a bill of indictment must particularize tbe crime charged and be sufficiently explicit to protect tbe defendant against a subsequent prosecution for tbe same offense. Tbis tbe bill of indictment appearing in tbis record fails to do. S. v. Morgan, 226 N.C. 414, 38 S.E. 2d 166; S. v. Cochran, 230 N.C. 523, 53 S.E. 2d 663.

While a motion to quash is tbe most appropriate method of raising tbe question whether tbe bill of indictment charges tbe commission of any criminal offense, motion in arrest of judgment may be used to tbe same end. S. v. Cochran, supra.

S. v. Raynor, 235 N.C. 184, 69 S.E. 2d 155, and S. v. Thorne, 238 N.C. 392, 78 S.E. 2d 140, are directly in point. What is said in tbe opinions in those cases is controlling here.

Tbe defendant is entitled to bis discharge. To that end tbe judgment entered in the court below is arrested.

Reversed.

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