History
  • No items yet
midpage
State v. Sexton.
10 N.C. 184
N.C.
1824
Check Treatment

It is a familiar rule that the indictment should state that the defendant committed the offense on a specific day and year, but it is unnecessary to prove in any case the precise day and year, except where the time enters into the nature of the offense. But if the indictment lay the offense to have been committed on an impossible day or on a future day, the objection is as fatal as if no time at all had been inserted. Nor are indictments within the operation of the statutes of jeofails, and cannot, therefore, be amended. Being the finding of a jury upon oath, the court cannot amend without the concurrence of the grand jury by whom the bill is found. These rules are too plain to require authority, and show that the judgment of the court was right, and must be

PER CURIAM. Affirmed.

Cited: S. v. Cody, 119 N.C. 909 *Page 96

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Sexton.
Court Name: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Date Published: Jun 5, 1824
Citation: 10 N.C. 184
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.