From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Freeman

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Feb 1, 1894
19 S.E. 630 (N.C. 1894)

Opinion

(February Term, 1894.)

Practice — Certiorari — Failure to Docket Transcript.

Where an appellant, without whose default the case on appeal was not settled by the judge, failed to docket the transcript of the record at the next succeding [succeeding] term of this Court, but applied at such term for a certiorari, the writ will not be allowed.

THE defendant was tried and convicted at Fall Term, 1893, of MADISON, before Armfield, J., on an indictment under section 1062 of the Code, and appealed. Without default of his own (as defendant alleges), the case on appeal was not settled by the judge below, and at this (February, 1894) Term of this Court he applied for a certiorari, but did not cause the transcript of the record to be docketed.

Attorney-General for the State.

J. F. Morphew for defendant.


This is a petition for certiorari. It was filed at the first term of this Court after the trial below. The ground of the application is that the case on appeal was not settled by the judge without any default on the part of the appellant. The petitioner, however, failed to docket at such term the transcript of the record proper. In Pittman v. Kimberly, 92 N.C. 562, it is held by Smith, C. J., that if for any reason the judge fails to settle the case on appeal on disagreement of counsel, the appellant must in proper time docket the transcript of the record proper, and then move for a certiorari to bring up the "case on appeal," and that it is the duty of the appellant, not of the clerk, to have the record sent up. In that case the appeal was dismissed, even though, unlike the present case, the transcript of the record (873) proper had been filed at the next term before the motion to dismiss was made. In this case no record proper has yet been filed, and there is nothing to show that the case was properly constituted in the court below. There is nothing before us save the petition.

Pittman v. Kimberly, supra, is exactly in point, and has often been cited and approved. Stephens v. Koonce, 106 N.C. 255, 256; Porter v. R. R., 106 N.C. 478; S. v. Preston, 104 N.C. 733; Bailey v. Brown, 105 N.C. 127; Pipkin v. Green, 112 N.C. 355. Motion denied and appeal.

Dismissed.

Cited: Paine v. Cureton, ante, 607; Causey v. Snow, 116 N.C. 498; Shober v. Wheeler, 119 N.C. 472; Brown v. House, ib., 623; Burrell v. Hughes, 120 N.C. 278; Guano Co. v. Hicks, ib., 30; Parker v. R. R., 121 N.C. 504; Walsh v. Burleson, 154 N.C. 175.


Summaries of

State v. Freeman

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Feb 1, 1894
19 S.E. 630 (N.C. 1894)
Case details for

State v. Freeman

Case Details

Full title:STATE v. B. F. FREEMAN

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Feb 1, 1894

Citations

19 S.E. 630 (N.C. 1894)
114 N.C. 872

Citing Cases

Walsh v. Burleson

The uniform holding of this Court has been that a certiorari will not be granted in such case unless the…

Stone v. Ledbetter

" To the same effect is Brown v. House, 119 N.C. 622: "The appellee makes the objection to the petition for…