Summary
In State v. Jamieson, 232 N.C. 731, 62 S.E.2d 52, the minute docket of the trial showed that defendant, through counsel, tendered a plea of nolo contendere, which plea was accepted by the State and thereupon the court entered judgment imposing sentence.
Summary of this case from State v. NormanOpinion
Filed 29 November, 1950.
Criminal Law 17c, 60b — A plea of nolo contendere has the same effect as a plea of guilty and supports the imposition of judgment, and defendant may not complain of such judgment on the ground that the plea was entered in order that the judge should hear the evidence, and the facts, and render such verdict as the testimony indicated.
APPEAL by defendant from Phillips, J., at May Term, 1950, of UNION.
Attorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attorney-General Bruton for the State.
Elbert E. Foster and J. F. Flowers for defendant, appellant.
JOHNSON, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Criminal prosecution upon warrant charging that defendant "unlawfully and willfully, did possess, transport, sell, offer for sale, and place in Union County, for the purpose of being operated numerous illegal punch boards, contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided," etc.
The minute docket of Superior Court of Union County contains these entries: "The defendant D. M. Jamieson, through his counsel, tenders to the State a plea of nolo contendere to the charge" described verbatim as in the warrant above, "which plea is accepted by the State," and that thereupon the court entered judgment imposing sentence as specified.
On the other hand, the case on appeal states that the defendant entered a plea of nolo contendere and agreed that the judge should hear the evidence, find the facts, and render such verdict as the testimony indicated.
From judgment pronounced defendant appeals to Supreme Court and assigns error.
Defendant, having entered plea of nolo contendere to the charge against him, finds himself in like situation to that of defendant in S. v. Shepherd, 230 N.C. 605, 55 S.E.2d 79. His plea, for purposes of judgment and disposition, has the same effect as a plea of guilty. Hence as in the Shepherd case the judgment must be, and it is
Affirmed.
JOHNSON, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.