Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

112 N.C. 856

16 S.E 930

State v. . Rhodes

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 5, 1893

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1893-02-05

IndiotmeNT against the defendant, James Rhodes, for burning certain barns, the property of Mrs. Mary H. King, tried before Shuford, J., and a jury, at January Term, 1898, of FrankxiN Superior Court. Tliere was a verdict of guilty, and from the judgment thereon defendant was allowed to appeal in forma pauperis, hut in the affidavit omitted to aver that the application was made in good faith.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently September 1897

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1893-02-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam:

¶1 The right to appeal in forma pauperis requires some restrictions against abuse. What thej” shall be is for the Legislature to determine ; it has set out the requirements in The Code, §1235. The Court has no right to abrogate any of these requisites. This has been often *857 decided. State v. Jackson, at this Term; State v. Wylde, 110 N. C., 500; State v. Tow, 103 N. C, 350; State v. Jones, 93 N. C., 617; and, indeed, in a full score of cases.

¶2 The present case presents an affidavit which lacks the statutory requirement of an averment “of good faith.” The appellant has not done what was requisite to place his appeal before us. We cannot help him, and the attempted appeal must be dismissed.

¶3 Appeal Dismissed.

/112/nc/856 · .json · Public domain