State v. . Smith

Decided February 5, 1889

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1889-02-05

INDICTMENT, for going upon the land of another, after being forbidden, tried before Armfield, J., at January Term, 1889, of the Superior Court of Pitt. The defendant was arrested upon a criminal warrant,, issued by a Justice of the Peace, charging him with going upon the land of another without a license, having first been forbidden to do so, in violation of the statute (The Code, § 1120).

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1889-02-05

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently March 1950

3 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

*411 Merrimon, J.

¶1 (after stating the case). The amendment of the warrant allowed did not change the nature of the-offence charged, or affect the substance thereof, nor did it deprive the defendant of any defence he might or could have made. The power of the Superior Court to allow such amendments is very comprehensive, and is intended to help-actions and proceedings, both civil and criminal, beginning in courts of Justices of the Peace. This authority to exercise such power has been repeatedly considered by this Court, and is well settled. State v. Vaughan, 91 N. C., 532; State v. Crook, ibid., 536; Singer Mfg. Co v. Barrett, 95 N. C., 36.

¶2 Yery clearly the Superior Court had power to allow the amendments complained of, and properly did so.

¶3 No error. Affirmed.