Opinion

State v. . Morgan

  • 226 N.C. 414
  • 38 S.E.2d 166
  • 1946 N.C. LEXIS 453
Court
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Filed
May 22, 1946
Status
Published
Author
Barnhill
On the bench
Barnhill
Cited by
65 cases
Authority
More cited than 98.3%

The opinion

Barnhill, J.

The defendant does not bring forward his exception to the denial of his motion in arrest of judgment. Even so it raises a jurisdictional question which compels our attention.

S. v. Clarke,

220 N. C., 392 , 17 S. E. (2d), 468 .

It is a universal rule that no indictment, whether at common law or under a statute, can be good if it does not accurately and clearly allege all the constituent elements of the offense charged.

S. v. Johnson,

188 N. C., 591 , 125 S. E., 183 .

A valid warrant or indictment is an essential of jurisdiction.

S. v. Beasley,

208 N. C., 318 , 180 S. E., 598 ;

S. v. Rawls,

203 N. C., 436 , 166 S. E., 332 ;

S. v. Banks,

206 N. C., 479 , 174 S. E., 806 . Hence, where no crime is charged in the warrant or bill of indictment upon which the defendant has been tried and convicted the judgment must be arrested.

S. v. Johnson, ante,

266;

S. v. Vanderlip,

225 N. C., 610 ;

S. v. Clarke, supra; S. v. McLamb,

214 N. C., 322 , 199 S. E., 81 ;

S. v. Tarlton,

208 N. C., 734 , 182 S. E., 481 ;

S. v. Tyson,

208 N. C., 231 , 180 S. E., 85 ;

S. v. Cook,

207 N. C., 261 , 176 S. E., 757 ;

S. v. Lewis,

194 N. C., 620 , 140 S. E., 434 ;

S. v. Anderson,

196 N. C., 771 , 147 S. E., 305 ;

S. v. Brady,

177 N. C., 587 , 99 S. E.,

7; S. v. McKnight,

196 N. C., 259 , 145 S. E., 281 .

Under G. S., 49-2, the neglect or refusal to support an illegitimate child must hfi,willful and it must be so charged in the warrant or bill of indictment. The omission of such allegation is fatal.

S. v. Vanderlip, supra; S. v. Hayden,

224 N. C., 779 ;

S. v. McLamb, supra; S. v. Clarke, supra; S. v. Tarlton, supra; S. v. Tyson, supra; S. v. Cook, supra.

When a fatal defect disclosing want of jurisdiction appears on the face of the record this Court, in the absence of a motion, will stay further proceedings

ex mero motu. S. v. Clarke, supra; Shepard v. Leonard,

223 N. C., 110 , 25 S. E. (2d), 445 .

Such action does not prejudice the defendant, for a void warrant will not support a plea of former jeopardy upon a subsequent trial.

S. v.

*416

Ellis,

200 N. C., 77 , 156 S. E., 157 ;

S. v. Bell,

205 N. C., 225 , 171 S. E., 50 ;

S. v. Beasley, supra.

The State did not exercise its right to amend.

S. v. Goff,

205 N. C., 545 , 172 S. E., 407 ;

S. v. Walker,

179 N. C., 730 , 102 S. E., 404 ;

S. v. Hurd,

197 N. C., 707 , 150 S. E., 353 . The warrant as it appears in the record charges no criminal offense. Hence the court below was without power or authority to pronounce judgment.

Judgment arrested.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.