{
  "id": 8556054,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. EUGENE ENSLIN",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Enslin",
  "decision_date": "1975-05-07",
  "docket_number": "No. 754SC90",
  "first_page": "662",
  "last_page": "663",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "25 N.C. App. 662"
    }
  ],
  "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": "195 S.E. 2d 352",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1973,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "17 N.C. App. 664",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8556654
      ],
      "year": 1973,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/17/0664-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "205 S.E. 2d 361",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1974,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "22 N.C. App. 47",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        11299091
      ],
      "year": 1974,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/22/0047-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 175,
    "char_count": 1864,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.604,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.422451957179399e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8011606082053433
    },
    "sha256": "89d9a22f0f6dac8811fe3fa36d271143ca7179e6f45d6fdf6216fc3a54cfedbf",
    "simhash": "1:8df82035c1b13ef6",
    "word_count": 300
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:30:12.075015+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges Hedrick and Martin concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. EUGENE ENSLIN"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "BRITT, Judge.\nBy his sole assignment of error, defendant contends the court erred in denying his motions to quash the indictment, dismiss the action, and for nonsuit on the ground that the statute under which he was indicted, G.S. 14-177, is unconstitutional, in that it violates the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Federal Constitution. We find no merit in the assignment.\nIn State v. Crouse, 22 N.C. App. 47, 205 S.E. 2d 361 (1974), and State v. Moles, 17 N.C. App. 664, 195 S.E. 2d 352 (1973), this court upheld the constitutionality of G.S. 14-177. We reaffirm- our rulings in these cases and again hold that the subject statute is constitutional.\nNo error.\nJudges Hedrick and Martin concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "BRITT, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Edmisten, by Assistant Attorney General Edwin M. Speas, Jr., for the State.",
      "Smith, Carrington, Patterson, Foll\u00edn & Curtis, by Norman B. Smith, and Marilyn G. Haft (by brief), for defendant oppel-lant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. EUGENE ENSLIN\nNo. 754SC90\n(Filed 7 May 1975)\nCrime Against Nature \u00a7 1\u2014 constitutionality of statute\nG.S. 14-177 which provides that the crime against nature is a felony is constitutional.\nAppeal by defendant from Webb, Judge. Judgment entered 26- September 1974 in Superior Court, Onslow County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 9 April 1975.\nBy bill of indictment proper, in form defendant was charged with committing \u201c . . . the abominable and detestable crime against nature with Herbert P. Morgan, a male person . \u201d\nBefore pleading, defendant moved to quash the indictment and for a dismissal of the prosecution on the ground that the indictment is unconstitutional.\nThe court reserved its ruling on the motion to quash but later overruled it. Defendant pleaded not guilty, a jury found him guilty as charged, and from judgment imposing prison sentence of one year, defendant appealed.\nAttorney General Edmisten, by Assistant Attorney General Edwin M. Speas, Jr., for the State.\nSmith, Carrington, Patterson, Foll\u00edn & Curtis, by Norman B. Smith, and Marilyn G. Haft (by brief), for defendant oppel-lant."
  },
  "file_name": "0662-01",
  "first_page_order": 690,
  "last_page_order": 691
}