State v. Woodfin

State v. Ephraim Woodfin.

State v. Woodfin, 87 N.C. 526 (1882)

Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina · State Highest Courts
Decided: October 5, 1882
Judges: Ashe
Citations: 87 N.C. 526

Cited by 5

Headnotes

Concealed Weapon. If one carry a pistol off his own premises, concealed about his person, for the purpose of hunting, he is guilty of a violation of the statute.

Summary

Indictment for carrying a pistol concealed, in. violation of the act of 1879, ch. 127, tried at Spring Term, 1881, of BUNCOMBE Superior Court, before Bennett, J. On the trial the defendant’s .counsel requested the court to charge the jury that if they believed the defendant carried the pistol only for the purpose of hunting with it, and that he carried it openly and not concealed on his person for the purpose of hunting merely, he could not be convicted. His Honor declined to give this special instruction and charged the jury, that it matters not for what the defendant carried the pistol, whether to hunt or for other purposes, yet if he carried it off his own.premises concealed about his person, he is guilty. If it was not concealed, of course he is not guilty. Verdict of guilty, judgment, appeal by defendant.

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

Opinion of the Court — Ashe

Ashe, J.

The facts of the case are not set forth in the statement made up by His Honor, and we are left to infer what they were from the special instructions asked by the defendant, and the charge to the jury.

From these we infer the defendant went hunting with a pistol in his pocket, or concealed about his person. If so he was clearly guilty of a violation of the statute.

*527 There is no error in the refusal of the court to give the instructions asked ; and while we think he laid down the law somewhat too broadly in his charge to the jury, yet so far as it applied to the supposed facts of the case, it ivas not erroneous.

No error. Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 5 cases

View all citing references →

State Highest Courts5

Relies on it most ⓘ

State v. Simmons56 S.E. 701 (N.C. 1907)
State v. Dixon19 S.E. 364 (N.C. 1894)
State v. Woodlief90 S.E. 137 (N.C. 1916)
State v. Mangum121 S.E. 765 (N.C. 1924)
State v. Erwin91 N.C. 545 (1884)

Most recent

State v. Mangum121 S.E. 765 (N.C. 1924)
State v. Woodlief90 S.E. 137 (N.C. 1916)
State v. Simmons56 S.E. 701 (N.C. 1907)
State v. Dixon19 S.E. 364 (N.C. 1894)
State v. Erwin91 N.C. 545 (1884)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

`/`	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