Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

32 N.C. 39

State v. Ray

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided August 15, 1849

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1849-08-15

The defendant was indicted for a forcible trespass in seizing, and, with a strong hand, taking out of the possession of one David Byrd a certain promissory note, then in the lawful possession of the said David Byrd.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently June 1957

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1849-08-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Pearson, J.

¶1Wf concur with his Honor, below, that ■the defendant is not guilty of forcible trespass. That of-fence must be charged, as being done with a strong hand, “ manuforti,” which implies greater force than is expressed by the words “ vi et armis.” There must be a demon stration of force, as with weapons, or a multitude of people, so as to involve a breach of the peace, or directly tend to it, and be calculated to intimidate or put in fear. State v. Flowers, 1 Mur. 254. State v. Fisher, 1 Dev. 357. State v. Mills, 2 Dev. 420. The jury find, that the defend ant obtained the note from Byrd by stratagem and “fraud.” This resembles larceny more than forcible trespass.

¶2. The Court thinks there should be judgment for the defendant.

Per Curiam.

¶3Ordered to be certified accordingly.

/32/nc/39 · .json · Public domain