140 S.E. 621 | N.C. | 1927
Criminal prosecution tried upon an indictment charging the defendant (1) with the larceny of an automobile, the property of "a party to the jurors unknown"; and (2) with receiving said automobile, the property "of the party unknown," knowing it to have been feloniously stolen or taken in violation of C. S., 4250.
Verdict: "Guilty of receiving stolen goods."
Judgment: Imprisonment in the State's prison, at hard labor, for a term of not less than two nor more than three years.
After trial the defendant employed counsel, who lodged motions (1) in arrest of judgment, alleging that the second count in the bill of indictment is defective; and (2) for a venire de novo on the ground that the verdict is not sufficient to support a judgment. Motions overruled and defendant appeals. Consideration of the question as to whether the second count in the bill of indictment is defective, as alleged, is omitted, for the reason that the verdict is insufficient to support a judgment, which necessitates awarding a venire de novo, and, with respect to the alleged defect, if any exist, the solicitor can easily cure same by sending another bill to the grand jury.
A similar verdict in almost exact form as the one now presented, was before the Court in the case of S. v. Whitaker,
Again, in S. v. Parker,
The pertinent authorities were again reviewed in S. v. Gregory,
Agreeable with these decisions a venire de novo must be awarded.
Venire de novo.