State v. Redmond
State of North Carolina v. Thomas Jeremiah Redmond
Opinion
CAMPBELL, Judge.
The defendant assigns as error the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a verdict of guilty of felonious breaking and entering because there was no evidence that the defendant intended to commit any crime since nothing was taken from the house.
There is no merit in this position.
In the case of State v. McBryde, 97 N.C. 393 , 1 S.E. 925 (1887), it is stated:
“. . . The intelligent mind will take cognizance of the fact, that people do not usually enter the dwellings of others in the night time, when the inmates are asleep, with innocent intent. The most usual intent is to steal, and when there is no explanation or evidence of a different intent, the ordinary mind will infer this also. The fact of the entry alone, in the night time, accompanied by flight when discovered, is some evidence of guilt, and in the absence of *588 any other proof, or evidence of other intent, and with no explanatory facts or circumstances, may warrant a reasonable inference of guilty intent. . .
As stated in State v. Tippett, 270 N.C. 588 , 155 S.E. 2d 269 (1967), “[Ajctual commission of the felony, which the indictment charges was intended by the defendant at the time of the breaking and entering, is not required in order to sustain a conviction of burglary. . . .”
We hold that the evidence in this case was ample to be submitted to the jury and to sustain the jury’s verdict of guilty.
No error.
Chief Judge Mallard and Judge Brock concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.