{
  "id": 4156285,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. NATHAN AARON CROSS a/k/a MICHAEL THOMAS FERGUSON",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Cross",
  "decision_date": "2008-01-15",
  "docket_number": "No. COA07-868",
  "first_page": "334",
  "last_page": "336",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "188 N.C. App. 334"
    }
  ],
  "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": [
    {
      "cite": "619 S.E.2d 502",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "case_ids": [
        12633957,
        12633958,
        12633959
      ],
      "year": 2005,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "parenthetical": "quoting Matthews v. Dept. of Transportation, 35 N.C. App. 768, 770, 242 S.E.2d 653, 654 (1978)"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/se2d/619/0502-01",
        "/se2d/619/0502-02",
        "/se2d/619/0502-03"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "242 S.E.2d 653",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1978,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "654"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "35 N.C. App. 768",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8552412
      ],
      "year": 1978,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "770"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/35/0768-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "360 N.C. 55",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        3796160
      ],
      "year": 2005,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "parenthetical": "quoting Matthews v. Dept. of Transportation, 35 N.C. App. 768, 770, 242 S.E.2d 653, 654 (1978)"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/360/0055-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "583 S.E.2d 294",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2003,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "297"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "159 N.C. App. 18",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8953762
      ],
      "year": 2003,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "21"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/159/0018-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "422 S.E.2d 443",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1992,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "parenthetical": "juvenile's appeal from training school commitment dismissed as moot where juvenile reached age of 18 years during pendency of appeal"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "108 N.C. App. 74",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8522543
      ],
      "year": 1992,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "parenthetical": "juvenile's appeal from training school commitment dismissed as moot where juvenile reached age of 18 years during pendency of appeal"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/108/0074-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "518 S.E.2d 255",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1999,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "parenthetical": "appeal from expired domestic violence protective order dismissed as moot"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "134 N.C. App. 642",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        11146815
      ],
      "year": 1999,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "parenthetical": "appeal from expired domestic violence protective order dismissed as moot"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/134/0642-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "159 S.E.2d 33",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1967,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "35",
          "parenthetical": "other citation omitted"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "272 N.C. 719",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8574498
      ],
      "year": 1967,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "722",
          "parenthetical": "other citation omitted"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/272/0719-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "390 S.E.2d 134",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1990,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "135",
          "parenthetical": "quoting Kendrick v. Cain, 272 N.C. 719, 722, 159 S.E.2d 33, 35 (1967) (other citation omitted). See also, e.g., Wilson v. Wilson, 134 N.C. App. 642, 518 S.E.2d 255 (1999) (appeal from expired domestic violence protective order dismissed as moot"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "326 N.C. 473",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        5307633
      ],
      "year": 1990,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "474-75",
          "parenthetical": "quoting Kendrick v. Cain, 272 N.C. 719, 722, 159 S.E.2d 33, 35 (1967) (other citation omitted). See also, e.g., Wilson v. Wilson, 134 N.C. App. 642, 518 S.E.2d 255 (1999) (appeal from expired domestic violence protective order dismissed as moot"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/326/0473-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 252,
    "char_count": 3180,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.722,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.527646540942415e-08,
      "percentile": 0.34705826478686597
    },
    "sha256": "184c68fe8104c605e74ba48491847bd9d161c8c36ecac1c2704471efc21bb9c1",
    "simhash": "1:0339d6c8442f2e45",
    "word_count": 517
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:34:30.605877+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges TYSON and JACKSON concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. NATHAN AARON CROSS a/k/a MICHAEL THOMAS FERGUSON"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "ARROWOOD, Judge.\nNathan Cross (defendant) appeals from judgments revoking probation. We dismiss his appeal as moot.\nIn 2003 Defendant was convicted of two charges of larceny of a motor vehicle, and one charge of felonious breaking and entering. He received suspended sentences of five to six months imprisonment in each case, and was placed on supervised probation. Probation violation reports were filed in June 2004. On 12 March 2007 the court revoked Defendant\u2019s probation and activated the five to six month sentences previously entered in each case. Defendant was given credit in each case for seventy-one (71) days already served.\nThe original judgments provided for consecutive sentences, but upon revocation the sentences were served concurrently. Although not made a part of the Record on Appeal, we take judicial notice of the fact that the North Carolina Department of Correction records indicate that Defendant\u2019s sentence expired and he was released from custody on 20 June 2007.\n\u201c \u2018[A]s a general rule this Court will not hear an appeal when the subject matter of the litigation has been settled between the parties or has ceased to exist.\u2019 By reason of the discharge of the [Defendant] from custody, the subject matter of this [appeal] has ceased to exist and the issue is moot.\u201d In re Swindell, 326 N.C. 473, 474-75, 390 S.E.2d 134, 135 (1990) (quoting Kendrick v. Cain, 272 N.C. 719, 722, 159 S.E.2d 33, 35 (1967) (other citation omitted). See also, e.g., Wilson v. Wilson, 134 N.C. App. 642, 518 S.E.2d 255 (1999) (appeal from expired domestic violence protective order dismissed as moot); In re Cowles, 108 N.C. App. 74, 422 S.E.2d 443 (1992) (juvenile\u2019s appeal from training school commitment dismissed as moot where juvenile reached age of 18 years during pendency of appeal).\n\u201cIn general, \u2018an appeal presenting a question which has become moot will be dismissed.\u2019 \u201d State v. Bowes, 159 N.C. App. 18, 21, 583 S.E.2d 294, 297 (2003), opinion vacated and dismissed as moot, 360 N.C. 55, 619 S.E.2d 502 (2005) (quoting Matthews v. Dept. of Transportation, 35 N.C. App. 768, 770, 242 S.E.2d 653, 654 (1978)).\nWe conclude that the subject of this appeal is moot and that Defendant\u2019s appeal must be\nDismissed.\nJudges TYSON and JACKSON concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "ARROWOOD, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Terence D. Friedman, for the State.",
      "Peter Wood for Defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. NATHAN AARON CROSS a/k/a MICHAEL THOMAS FERGUSON\nNo. COA07-868\n(Filed 15 January 2008)\nAppeal and Error\u2014 appealability \u2014 mootness\u2014revocation of probation \u2014 discharge from custody\nDefendant\u2019s appeal from judgments revoking probation is dismissed as moot, because: (1) the Court of Appeals took judicial notice of the fact that the North Carolina Department of Correction records indicated that defendant\u2019s sentence expired and he was released from custody on 20 June 2007; and (2) the subject matter of this appeal has ceased to exist and the issue is moot by reason of the discharge of defendant from custody.\nAppeal by Defendant from judgment entered 12 March 2007 by Judge Laura J. Bridges in County McDowell Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 13 December 2007.\nAttorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Terence D. Friedman, for the State.\nPeter Wood for Defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0334-01",
  "first_page_order": 364,
  "last_page_order": 366
}