From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

STATE v. NUTT

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jun 1, 1866
61 N.C. 20 (N.C. 1866)

Opinion

(June Term, 1866.)

If, pending an appeal in a criminal case, the statute authorizing the indictment is repealed, judgment will be arrested.

MISDEMEANOR, in the distillation of grain, tried before French, J., at Fall Term, 1864, of ORANGE Superior Court.

No statement of the case is necessary.

Attorney-General for the State.

Phillips Battle for defendant.


Since the trial of the defendant in the court below the statute under which he was convicted has been repealed. The repealing statute does not except from its operation offenses already (21) committed. The appeal vacates the judgment, and there is now no law under which judgment can be pronounced against the defendant.

Judgment must therefore be arrested.

PER CURIAM. Judgment arrested.

Cited: S. v. Brodnax, post, 43; S. v. Long, 78 N.C. 572; S. v. Williams, 97 N.C. 456; S. v. Perkins, 141 N.C. 798.


Summaries of

STATE v. NUTT

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jun 1, 1866
61 N.C. 20 (N.C. 1866)
Case details for

STATE v. NUTT

Case Details

Full title:STATE v. ERASMUS D. NUTT

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Jun 1, 1866

Citations

61 N.C. 20 (N.C. 1866)

Citing Cases

State v. Perkins

This is the well-settled principle, and it is essential in order to give effect to the clear intention of the…

State v. Pardon

The rule is that when a criminal statute is expressly and unqualifiedly repealed after the crime has been…