State v. Maultsby

State v. Maultsby.

State v. Maultsby, 41 S.E. 97 (N.C. 1902)

Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina · State Highest Courts
Decided: April 22, 1902
Judges: Clark
Citations: 41 S.E. 97130 N.C. 6641902 N.C. LEXIS 136

Headnotes

1. VERDICT — Setting Aside — Jury—Prosecuting Witness — Relationship. Refusal to set aside a verdict in a criminal action on account of relationship of prosecuting witness and a juror, discovered after verdict, is not revlewable on appeal. 2. VERDICT — Setting Aside — Evidence. , Refusal of trial judge to set aside a verdict against defendant in a criminal action as contrary to the evidence is not reviewable. ' 3. WITNESSES — Corroboration. Where the credibility of a witness is attacked, be may be corroborated by evidence of similar statements.

Summary

INDICTMENT against John W. Maultsby, beard by Judge W. S. O’B. 'Robinson and a jury, at January Term, 1902, of tbe Superior Court of Cumberland County. Erom a verdict of guilty and judgment thereon, the defendant appealed.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Clark

Clark, J.

The motion to set aside the verdict on account of relationship between the prosecuting witness and a juror, which was discovered after verdict — even if such relationship is ground of objection, as to which it is not necessary to decide — rested in the discretion of the trial Court, and its refusal is not reviewable on appeal. This has been held where the relationship between a party and a juror is not discovered till after verdict.

Spicer v. Fulgham, 67 N. C., 18 ;

Baxter v. Wilson, 95 N. C., 137 . The same ruling has been made where, after verdict, the juror was ascertained to be incompe *665 tent because a minor (State v. Lambert, 93 N. C., 618 ), or not a freeholder (State v. Orawford, 3 N. C., 485 ), or an atheist (State v. Davis, 80 N. C., 412 ), or a non-resident (State v. White, 68 N. C., 158 ), or for other causes, see State v. DeGraff, 113 N. C., 113 , and State v. Council, 129 N. C., 517 , and cases there cited.

The same is true as to the refusal of the motion. to set aside the verdict because contrary to the evidence or against the weight of the evidence.

Whitted v. Fuquay, 127 N. C., 68 ;

State v. Davis, 80 N. C., 384 ;

State v. Storkey, 63 N. C., 7 , and State v. Kearsey, 61 N. C., 481 .

It was competent to corroborate the witness, whose credibility had been attacked by the course of the cross-examination to show by his own testimony that soon after the occurrence and before this proceeding began he had made similar statements to his testimony on the stand.

State v. McKinney, 111 N. C., 683 ;

State v. Freeman, 100 N. C., 429 ;

State v. Parrish, 79 N. C., 610 , and cases cited in Walser’s Index-Digest, pages 97, 98.

No Error.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 23 cases

View all citing references →

State Highest Courts23

Relies on it most ⓘ

State v. Degraffenreid31 S.E.2d 523 (N.C. 1944)
State v. Scoggins33 S.E.2d 473 (N.C. 1945)
State v. Hooks47 S.E.2d 234 (N.C. 1948)
State v. Brown106 S.E.2d 232 (N.C. 1958)
State v. Rose111 S.E.2d 311 (N.C. 1959)
Young v. Southern Mica Co. of North Carolina, Inc.75 S.E.2d 795 (N.C. 1953)

Most recent

State v. Lentz153 S.E.2d 864 (N.C. 1967)
State v. Rose111 S.E.2d 311 (N.C. 1959)
State v. Brown106 S.E.2d 232 (N.C. 1958)
Young v. Southern Mica Co. of North Carolina, Inc.75 S.E.2d 795 (N.C. 1953)
State v. Hooks47 S.E.2d 234 (N.C. 1948)
State v. Scoggins33 S.E.2d 473 (N.C. 1945)

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.

Authorities cited 13

Depth	Case	Cited by
	Baxter v. Wilson, 95 N.C. 137 (1886)	36
	State v. Freeman, 5 S.E. 921 (N.C. 1888)	27
	State v. Lambert, 93 N.C. 618 (1885)	26
	State v. White, 68 N.C. 158 (1873)	26
	State v. Storkey, 63 N.C. 7 (1868)	24
	State v. Parish, 79 N.C. 610 (1878)	24
	State v. Davis, 80 N.C. 384 (1879)	21
	State v. Davis, 80 N.C. 412 (1879)	20
	Whitted v. Fuquay., 37 S.E. 141 (N.C. 1900)	19
	State v. Council, 40 S.E. 814 (N.C. 1901)	13
	Spicer v. Fulghum, 67 N.C. 18 (1872)	10
	State v. McKinney, 16 S.E. 235 (N.C. 1892)	9
	State v. Kearzey, 61 N.C. 481 (1868)	2

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list