# State v. Howard

> Supreme Court of North Carolina · December 3, 1901 · 129 N.C. 584

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6694345

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE v. HOWARD.—GOLD BRICK CASE
- **Court:** Supreme Court of North Carolina
- **Decided:** December 3, 1901
- **Citations:** 129 N.C. 584
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Montgomery
- **Judges:** Clark, Douglas, Eueches, Montgomery
- **Cited by:** 19 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/6694345

## Opinion text

MONTGOMERY, J.,
concurs in the conclusion reached by the Court. He thinks, however, that what his Honor said on the trial below, in declaring that two of the State’s witnesses were of so high a personal character as that he would not ask them to leave the court-room, on a motion for the separation of the witnesses, and also, what he said in his instructions to the jury in defending one of the same witnesses against the adverse criticisms of the defendant’s counsel on the witness’s testimony, was inappropriate and indiscreet. The language of the statute on the subject may not have been violated, but its spirit certainly was.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6694345. Public record. Not legal advice.