{
  "id": 8553114,
  "name": "IN THE MATTER OF: MICHAEL HARPER, AGE 14",
  "name_abbreviation": "In re Harper",
  "decision_date": "1971-12-29",
  "docket_number": "No. 713DC698",
  "first_page": "330",
  "last_page": "332",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "13 N.C. App. 330"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Ct. App.",
    "id": 14983,
    "name": "North Carolina Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 247,
    "char_count": 3886,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.558,
    "sha256": "b5515f802d052f1ec72a910e977daa7a838f226c6e5639db4400dab6288cfa5c",
    "simhash": "1:4168a84923ce394c",
    "word_count": 637
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:18:15.024983+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges Britt and Vaughn concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "IN THE MATTER OF: MICHAEL HARPER, AGE 14"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "BROCK, Judge.\nThe lengthy inquiry and finding by the presiding judge that Michael Harper had been properly advised of his constitutional rights does not seem to have accomplished any purpose. Generally, the inquiry is whether after having been advised of his constitutional rights an accused freely, understandingly, and voluntarily made a statement or gave a confession. However, in tMs case there was no objection to the introduction of the confession into evidence. Absent an appropriate objection, the confession was properly admitted, and the confession sustains the findings of delinquency by the presiding judge.\nWe note that the presiding judge ordered the juvenile to be placed with the N. C. Department of Juvenile Correction. Although the wording of the order is not fatal, trial judges would be well advised to follow the wording of the statute. In instances such as this, the correct order would be to commit the child to the care of the North Carolina Board of Juvenile Correction. G.S. 7A-286.\nIn our opinion Michael Harper had a fair hearing, free from prejudicial error.\nNo error.\nJudges Britt and Vaughn concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "BROCK, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Morgan, by Associate Attorney Haskell, for the State.",
      "Everett & Cheatham, by James T. Cheatham, for the juvenile-appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "IN THE MATTER OF: MICHAEL HARPER, AGE 14\nNo. 713DC698\n(Filed 29 December 1971)\n1. Infants \u00a7 10 \u2014 juvenile delinquency hearing \u2014 admission of confession\nJuvenile\u2019s confession was properly admitted in a juvenile delinquency hearing absent an appropriate objection, and the confession sustains the findings of delinquency by the presiding judge.\n2. Infants \u00a7 10 \u2014 commitment of juvenile delinquent\nJuvenile delinquent should be committed to the care of the \u201cBoard\u201d of Juvenile Correction, not the \u201cDepartment\u201d of Juvenile Correction.\nAppeal by Michael Harper from Wheeler, District Court Judge, 2 July 1971 Session of District Court held in Pitt County.\nIt was alleged in a petition that Michael Harper is a delinquent child as defined in G.S. 7A-278(2) by reason of his breaking or entering each of six premises and by reason of each of seven offenses of larceny.\nThe petition to invoke the jurisdiction of the court was filed by Lt. Dilda of the Farmville Police Department on 28 June 1971. On 28 June 1971 counsel was appointed to represent the alleged delinquent child, and a hearing was conducted on 2 July 1971.\nAn extensive evidentiary hearing was conducted to determine whether the juvenile had been properly advised of his constitutional rights. Upon this voir dire both the State and the juvenile offered evidence. At the conclusion of the voir dire, the presiding judge found \u201cthat the juvenile has been properly advised of his Constitutional rights.\u201d No objection or exception was made to this finding.\nOther than the voir dire- testimony, the only evidence offered at the hearing on the petition was the signed confession of the juvenile. The confession reads as follows:\n\u201cState\u2019s Exhibit No. 1\nOn June 2, 1971 I did admit to Breaking and Entering into Joe Blount\u2019s Store on April 12, 1971 and steal merchandise and I further admit that I broke into the following places and steal an undetermine amount of merchandise within these places:\nBroke Into: Shack on Apr. 12, 1971\nMachine in Walker Bldg on May 17, 1971\nHarris Place on May 23, 1971\nRuby Whites on May 28, 1971\nNat Norris on May 30, 1971\nJames Ridley Barber Shop on May 30, 1971\nSigned: Michael Harper\nDate: June 2, 1971\nWitness: Police Officer \u2014 J. C. Bryant, Jr.\u201d\nThe presiding judge found that Michael Harper was a delinquent child in each of thirteen findings and that he committed a criminal offense (six offenses of breaking or entering and seven offenses of larceny). Based thereon, the judge ordered that Michael Harper be placed with the N. C. Department of Juvenile Correction for an indefinite period of time.\nMichael Harper appealed.\nAttorney General Morgan, by Associate Attorney Haskell, for the State.\nEverett & Cheatham, by James T. Cheatham, for the juvenile-appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0330-01",
  "first_page_order": 354,
  "last_page_order": 356
}