From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Ray

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Aug 1, 1849
32 N.C. 29 (N.C. 1849)

Opinion

August Term, 1849.

The statement of the case by the presiding judge is, in our practice, a substitute for a bill of exceptions, which sets forth the errors complained of. If no such statement accompanies the appeal, and no error appears on the record, the judgment will be affirmed.

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Law of ASHE, at Fall Term, 1848, Moore, J., presiding.

Attorney-General for the State.

No counsel for defendants.


This Court is a court of errors to rectify (30) errors in law, and it is a settled rule to affirm every judgment appealed from which is not erroneous. The statement of the case by the presiding judge is, in our practice, a substitute for a bill of exceptions, which sets forth the errors complained of. If no such statement accompanies the case, it is our duty to pronounce such judgment upon the record as the court below ought to have done. No such statement accompanies this case. We have looked through the record carefully, and perceive no error in it. The judgment below, not being shown to be erroneous, must be considered correct in point of law, and must be affirmed.

PER CURIAM. Judgment affirmed.

Cited: Brown v. Kyle, 47 N.C. 443; S. v. Leitch, 82 N.C. 539; S. v. Powell, 94 N.C. 923; Walton v. McKesson, 101 N.C. 436; S. v. Davis, 109 N.C. 811; S. v. Lawson, 123 N.C. 743.


Summaries of

State v. Ray

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Aug 1, 1849
32 N.C. 29 (N.C. 1849)
Case details for

State v. Ray

Case Details

Full title:THE STATES v. JAMES RAY, SR., ET AL

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Aug 1, 1849

Citations

32 N.C. 29 (N.C. 1849)

Citing Cases

State v. Powell

This kind of practice cannot have the sanction of this Court. It is (923) incumbent upon the appellant, in…

State v. Oxendine

The offense of forcible trespass is defined in some of the cases to be the unlawful invasion of the…