Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

82 N.C. 694

State v. . Sherrill

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 5, 1880

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1880-01-05

<p>Variance, effect of — New trial.</p> <p>The effect of a variance between allegation and proof in a criminal action is to vacate the verdict and leave the defendant charged as before and liable to be tried again.</p>

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently December 1959

6 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1880-01-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Dillard, J.

¶1 As there was no final judgment in the court below, the appeal must be dismissed. State v. Keeter, 80 N. C., 472; State v. Bailey, 65 N. C., 426.

¶2 But as there seems to have been some misapprehension as to the effect of the decision in this case on the former appeal as reported in 81 N. C., 550, we will say, that the legal effect-of the appeal was to vacate the judgment below, and the error adjudged in this court by reason of the variance between the allegation and the proof, operated to put out of the way or vacate the verdict. And so, upon the certified opinion of this court, the defendant stood before the court *696 below in point of law charged upon a sufficient bill of indictment and is entitled to a new trial. Let thi%be certified.

¶3 Per Curiam. Appeal dismissed and venire de novo.

/82/nc/694 · .json · Public domain