{
  "id": 8554304,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. WALTER THANIEL PEGUISE",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Peguise",
  "decision_date": "1968-10-09",
  "docket_number": "No. 6814SC372",
  "first_page": "526",
  "last_page": "527",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "2 N.C. App. 526"
    }
  ],
  "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": "137 S.E. 2d 840",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "262 N.C. 446",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8568134
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/262/0446-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "67 S.E. 2d 748",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "234 N.C. 552",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8624537
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/234/0552-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "92 S.E. 2d 197",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "243 N.C. 766",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8627261
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/243/0766-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "140 S.E. 2d 547",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "263 N.C. 825",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8573531
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/263/0825-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 257,
    "char_count": 3535,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.566,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20598845724210177
    },
    "sha256": "574dbb05106d3529b588520d7d364ab586f91be78bff40a3ddf1f096e879b3b2",
    "simhash": "1:a4cf1c7270a08e6c",
    "word_count": 611
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:15:57.624547+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "BeocK and Paeicee, JJ., concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. WALTER THANIEL PEGUISE"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Britt, J.\nG.S. 15-179 provides those instances in which the State may appeal:\n\u201c* * * Where judgment has been given for the defendant \u2014\n(1) Upon a special verdict.\n(2) Upon a demurrer.\n(3) Upon a motion to quash.\n(4) Upon arrest of judgment.\n(5) Upon a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence, but only on questions of law.\n(6) Upon declaring a statute unconstitutional.\u201d\nThe Supreme Court of North Carolina has specifically held \u2022that the State has no right to appeal from a judgment allowing a plea of former jeopardy or acquittal. State v. Reid, 263 N.C. 825, 140 S.E. 2d 547; State v. Ferguson, 243 N.C. 766, 92 S.E. 2d 197; State v. Wilson, 234 N.C. 552, 67 S.E. 2d 748.\nG.S. 1-201 provides as follows: \u201cA general verdict is that by which the jury pronounce generally upon all or any of the issues, \u2022either in favor of the plaintiff or defendant. A special verdict is that by which the jury finds the facts only, leaving the judgment to the Court.\u201d (Emphasis added.)\nGeneral and special verdicts are discussed in 2 McIntosh, N. C. Practice 2d, \u00a7 1562, pp. 75 and 76. See also State v. Ellis, 262 N.C. 446, 137 S.E. 2d 840.\nThe order of Judge Clark did not constitute a special verdict from \u25a0which an appeal by the State could be taken.\nAppeal dismissed.\nBeocK and Paeicee, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Britt, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General T. Wade Bruton and Staff Attorney Andrew A. \"Va\u00f1ore, Jr., for the State.",
      "Pearson, Malone, Johnson & DeJarm\u00f3n by W. G. Pearson, II, -and C. C. Malone, Jr., for defendant appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. WALTER THANIEL PEGUISE\nNo. 6814SC372\n(Filed 9 October 1968)\n1. Criminal Law \u00a7 149\u2014 former jeopardy \u2014 right of State to appeal?\nThe State has no right to appeal from a judgment allowing a plea of former jeopardy or acquittal.\n2. Criminal Law \u00a7 125\u2014 special verdict defined\nA special verdict is that by which the jury finds the facts only, leaving the judgment to the court. G.S. 1-201.\n3. Criminal Law \u00a7\u00a7 125, 149\u2014 allowance of plea of former jeopardy \u2014 not special verdict \u2014 right of State to appeal\nAn order allowing defendant\u2019s plea of former jeopardy and dismissing; the charge against defendant does not constitute a special verdict fronn which the State may appeal pursuant to G.S. 15-179.\nAppeal by the State from Clark, J., July 1968 Regular Criminal\u2019 Session of Durham Superior Court.\nDefendant was tried on two separate warrants. The first charged\u2019 him with an assault on G. E. Lee \u201cby striking him with his fists and. hands and by climbing on his back.\u201d The second charged him with-resisting, delaying and obstructing a public officer, G. E. Lee, in the-discharge of his duty, namely, attempting to arrest one Howard Lamar Fuller, \u201cby striking him with his fists and hands and by-climbing on his back.\u201d Defendant pled not guilty to both charges and the two cases were consolidated for trial. In the assault case, the-jury returned a verdict of not guilty. In the other case, the jury-stated \u201cthat they were unable to agree on a verdict.\u201d Thereupon, the-presiding judge withdrew a juror and declared a mistrial as to the-second case, that of resisting a public officer.\nCounsel for defendant then interposed a plea of double jeopardy as to the charge of resisting a public officer. The court entered an \u2022order dismissing the charge; but, in entering the order, Judge Clark declared: \u201cThis, Mr. Solicitor, is a special verdict. * * * I am \u25a0making this in the form of a special verdict so that the State may-appeal to the Appeal Court.\u201d The State duly entered its exception .and appealed.\nAttorney General T. Wade Bruton and Staff Attorney Andrew A. \"Va\u00f1ore, Jr., for the State.\nPearson, Malone, Johnson & DeJarm\u00f3n by W. G. Pearson, II, -and C. C. Malone, Jr., for defendant appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0526-01",
  "first_page_order": 546,
  "last_page_order": 547
}