{
  "id": 8549323,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. CHARLES E. BLANTON",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Blanton",
  "decision_date": "1973-11-28",
  "docket_number": "No. 7327SC683",
  "first_page": "66",
  "last_page": "68",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "20 N.C. App. 66"
    }
  ],
  "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": "128 S.E. 2d 889",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1963,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "258 N.C. 453",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8561130
      ],
      "year": 1963,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "459"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/258/0453-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "169 S.E. 2d 265",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1969,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "6 N.C. App. 1",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8546638
      ],
      "year": 1969,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/6/0001-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 326,
    "char_count": 4236,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.587,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.2058743579258868
    },
    "sha256": "36a6b3e260be2ae904a5842ed89442d784a3e27c9b792e94367504a3d0879bf0",
    "simhash": "1:9dd5b52457daec59",
    "word_count": 714
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:39:00.958655+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Chief Judge Brock arid Judge Morris concur.-'1"
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. CHARLES E. BLANTON"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "BRITT, Judge.\nAll of defendant\u2019s assignments of error relate to the court\u2019s instructions to the jury. He contends that the court erred in charging (1) that defendant\u2019s act was unlawful if he pointed a pistol at Cordell and (2) \u201cthat the Law in this State is that where a person points a gun at another, though without intention of discharging it, if the gun does accidentally fire and kills, it is manslaughter under the Law of this State.\u201d\nIn 4 Strong, N. C. Index 2d, Homicide, \u00a7 6, p. 198, we find involuntary manslaughter defined as follows :\n\u201cInvoluntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being, unintentionally and without malice, proximately resulting from the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to a felony, or resulting from some act done in an unlawful or culpably negligent manner, when fatal consequences were not improbable under all the facts existent at the time, or resulting from the culpably negligent omission to perform a legal duty.\u201d\nQuoted with approval by Chief Judge Mallard in State v. Lawson, 6 N.C. App. 1, 169 S.E. 2d 265 (1969).\nG.S. 14-34 provides that if any person shall point any gun or pistol at any person, either in fun or otherwise, whether such gun or pistol be loaded or not loaded, he shall be guilty of an assault.\nIn State v. Foust, 258 N.C. 453, 459, 128 S.E. 2d 889 (1963), Justice (later Chief Justice) Parker, writing for the court, said: \u201cIt seems that, with few exceptions, it may be said that every unintentional killing of a human being proximately caused by a wanton or reckless use of firearms, in the absence df intent to discharge the weapon, or in the belief that it is not loaded, and under circumstances not evidencing a heart devoid of a sense of social duty, is involuntary manslaughter. (Citations.)\u201d\nThe trial court\u2019s instructions are supported by the statute and authorities cited. In the trial of this case, we find\nNo error.\nChief Judge Brock arid Judge Morris concur.-'1",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "BRITT, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Robert Morgan by Claude W. Harris, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.",
      "Robert E. Gaines for defendant appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. CHARLES E. BLANTON\nNo. 7327SC683\n(Filed 28 November 1973)\nHomicide \u00a7 27\u2014 unintentional shooting \u2014 instruction on manslaughter proper\nThe trial court properly instructed in a manslaughter case \u201cthat the Law in this State is that where a person points a gun at another, though without intention of discharging it, if the gun does accidentally fire and kills, it is manslaughter under the Law of this State.\u201d G.S. 14-34.\nAppeal by defendant from Thornburg, Judge, 12 March 1973 Criminal Session Gaston Superior Court.\nBy indictment, proper in form, defendant was charged with the murder of Harry Cordell on 8 October 1972. When the case was called for trial, the solicitor announced that the State would seek no verdict greater than voluntary manslaughter as the evidence might warrant.\nThe evidence tended to show: Defendant and Cordell were friends, and on the night in question Cordell and his wife were visiting defendant in his home. The two men were in the kitchen, sitting at a table, drinking intoxicants and talking. Cordell asked defendant if he could still do his \u201cfast draw\u201d trick, the trick being explained by witnesses thusly: a person, while sitting or standing, would hold his hands extended forward several inches apart; defendant, with a pistol in a holster strapped to his body, would attempt to draw his pistol and place it between the hands of the other person before that person could clap his hands together. Defendant replied that he could still do the trick and proceeded to try it with a .22 caliber pistol. The pistol discharged, a bullet struck Cordell in the front of his head and killed him almost instantly. When police recovered the pistol shortly after the tragedy, it contained four live cartridges and one spent cartridge. Defendant told police that he had forgotten that he loaded the pistol some three or four days earlier.\nThe court submitted the case to the jury on the question of involuntary manslaughter. From a verdict of guilty and judgment imposing prison sentence of not less than four nor more than five years, with recommendation for work release, defendant appealed.\nAttorney General Robert Morgan by Claude W. Harris, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.\nRobert E. Gaines for defendant appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0066-01",
  "first_page_order": 94,
  "last_page_order": 96
}