{
  "id": 8556177,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ROY V. CLARK, JR.",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Clark",
  "decision_date": "1975-05-07",
  "docket_number": "No. 7527SC20",
  "first_page": "677",
  "last_page": "678",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "25 N.C. App. 677"
    }
  ],
  "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": "196 S.E. 2d 592",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1973,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "18 N.C. App. 208",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8548168
      ],
      "year": 1973,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/18/0208-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "189 S.E. 2d 505",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1972,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "15 N.C. App. 234",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8549245
      ],
      "year": 1972,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/15/0234-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 160,
    "char_count": 1867,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.587,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.0446031217563963e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7531076136099054
    },
    "sha256": "664d24e6185b764e93931e473c22c01868d490a47f87478a8047095f9a6041f4",
    "simhash": "1:7dea22ed6561a533",
    "word_count": 314
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:30:12.075015+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges Britt and Hedrick concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ROY V. CLARK, JR."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "MAETIN, Judge.\nWe note that the judgment appealed from was entered 11 September 1974. More than ninety days thereafter, the trial court granted defendant\u2019s motion for an extension of the time to docket the record on appeal in this Court. This was too late. See State v. Lee, 15 N.C. App. 234, 189 S.E. 2d 505 (1972). \u201cWithin ninety days after the date of a judgment appealed from, but not thereafter, the trial tribunal may for good' cause shown extend the time for docketing the record on appeal not exceeding sixty days. Eule 5.\u201d State v. Lassiter, 18 N.C. App. 208, 196 S.E. 2d 592 (1973).\nFor failure to comply with the Eules of Practice in the Court of Appeals, this appeal is subject to dismissal. Nevertheless, we have carefully considered defendant\u2019s assignments of error and conclude that defendant\u2019s trial was free of prejudicial error.\nAppeal dismissed.\nJudges Britt and Hedrick concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "MAETIN, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Edmisten, by Associate Attorney Jerry J. Rutledge, for the State.",
      "M. Clark Parker, for defendant appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ROY V. CLARK, JR.\nNo. 7527SC20\n(Filed 7 May 1975)\nCriminal Law \u00a7 155.5\u2014 docketing of record \u2014 expiration of 90 days \u2014 extension of time\nAppeal is subject to dismissal where the record on appeal was not docketed within 90 days after the date of the judgment appealed from and an order extending the time for docketing was entered after the 90-day period had expired. Court of Appeals Rule 5.\nAppeal by defendant from Grist, Judge. Judgment entered 11 September 1974 in Superior Court, Lincoln County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 18 March 1975.\nDefendant was charged in a bill of indictment with the larceny of an automobile belonging to Nadine Ellis Brown and having a value of $600.00. He pleaded not guilty. The jury found defendant guilty as charged, and from judgment entered on the verdict, defendant appealed.\nAttorney General Edmisten, by Associate Attorney Jerry J. Rutledge, for the State.\nM. Clark Parker, for defendant appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0677-01",
  "first_page_order": 705,
  "last_page_order": 706
}