History
  • No items yet
midpage
State v. Cox
265 N.C. 344
N.C.
1965
Check Treatment
Pee Ctjbiam.

On the face of the record there appears a fatal error which the Court will notice ex mero motu. State v. Dunston, 256 N.C. 203, 123 S.E. 2d 480. This case is controlled by State v. Muse, 219 N.C. 226, 13 S.E. 2d 229, in which the Court said:

“When a defendant in a criminal prosecution in the Superior Court enters a plea of not guilty he may not, without changing his plea, waive his constitutional right of trial by jury, S. v. Hill, 209 N.C. 53, 182 S.E. 716, the determinative facts cannot be referred to the decision of the court even by consent-they must be found by the jury. S. v. Allen, 166 N.C. 265, 80 S.E. 1075.” Id. at 227, 13 S.E. 2d 229.

Accord: State v. Harper, 235 N.C. 62, 69 S.E. 2d 161; State v. Horne, 234 N.C. 115, 66 S.E. 2d 665; State v. Holt, 90 N.C. 749.

Since the guilt of defendant has not been established by a verdict, Sitterson v. Sitterson, 191 N.C. 319, 131 S.E. 641, the sentence imposed by the judge is a nullity. No trial has been had. The case is remanded to the Superior Court for a trial by jury as the law provides.

Error and remanded.

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Cox
Court Name: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Date Published: Sep 22, 1965
Citation: 265 N.C. 344
Court Abbreviation: N.C.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.