# State v. Brown

> Supreme Court of North Carolina · October 12, 1960 · 253 N.C. 195

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1329308

## Case

- **Full name:** State v. Emanuel “shug” Brown
- **Court:** Supreme Court of North Carolina
- **Decided:** October 12, 1960
- **Citations:** 253 N.C. 195; 116 S.E.2d 349; 1960 N.C. LEXIS 469
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Per Curiam
- **Cited by:** 10 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1329308

## Opinion text

Pee CüRiam.
The principles of law applied by this Court in
State v. Wilson,
216 N.C. 130 , 4 S.E. 2d 440 , are controlling on this appeal. Payment of fine as a condition of suspension of sentence does not render void the subsequent activation of the prison term for breach of other conditions. Defendant is not twice punished for the same offense. Conspiracy to violate the liquor law is a misdemeanor and punishable as at common law, that is, by fine or imprisonment, or'both. G.S. 14-3.
State v. Powell,
94 N.C. 920, 923-4 .
The conditions imposed in the judgment of June 1956 are not unreasonable. The period of suspension is within legal limits. G.S. 15-200. The breach of condition that defendant be law abiding and of good behavior has been held a sufficient predicate for putting prison sentence into effect.
State v. Wilson,
supra. ■
*197
The judgment of July 1960 recites that the court heard evidence “of the State and the defendant.” The only evidence brought forward in the record is the minutes of the Recorder’s Court of Meck-lenburg County showing that in May 1960 defendant pleaded guilty to receiving stolen goods. Defendant objected to this evidence. The ground of obj ection does not appear in the record and does not clearly appear in the brief. The guilty plea is sufficient basis for a finding that the failure to be of good behavior was wilful. Rules of evidence are not so strictly enforced in a hearing by the judge as in a trial by jury.
The judgment below is
Affirmed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1329308. Public record. Not legal advice.