State v. Burgess

Decided January 15, 1876

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1876-01-15

INDICTMENT for larceny, tried before bis Ilonor Judge Cannon, at Fall Term, 1875, of the Superior Court of Clay county. The defendant was charged with the larceny of a pair of shoes, the property of Joshua Brooks.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1876-01-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently February 2018

8 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 →

Reade, J.

¶1The probata does not correspond with the aVeynt. , and that is always fatal. If one is charged with-, stealing the property of A, it will not do to prove that he¡ .stole the joint property of A and B.

¶2It was not strictly regular to take the objection after verdict on a motion in arrest of judgment; it ought to have been, taken on the trial; but still we see from the record that there was a fatal variance between the charge and the proof, and! that the defendant ought not to have been convicted. And therefore there was error.

¶3There is error.

¶4Peb Curiam. Venire de novo.