{
  "id": 8555608,
  "name": "STATE v. JERRY OSCAR PERRYMAN",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Perryman",
  "decision_date": "1969-05-28",
  "docket_number": "No. 6922SC196",
  "first_page": "684",
  "last_page": "685",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "4 N.C. App. 684"
    }
  ],
  "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": "165 S.E. 2d 674",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "4 N.C. App. 109",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8551701
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/4/0109-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "147 S.E. 2d 570",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "267 N.C. 126",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8558640
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/267/0126-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 197,
    "char_count": 2608,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.595,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 7.191620216411741e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4302961292337893
    },
    "sha256": "5339b71d83be6973e14449a06442d33b4a863a62fb7ec556beee79c0e39baf13",
    "simhash": "1:5cecfc7c5ce08cd7",
    "word_count": 426
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:50:38.610889+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Mallabd, C.J., and Moeeis, J., concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. JERRY OSCAR PERRYMAN"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Campbell, J.\nCounsel for the defendant concedes that he has found no error in the proceedings in the trial court. He nevertheless desires this Court to review the record and the sentence.\nWe have carefully examined the record and find no prejudicial error therein. The maximum punishment for the felony of breaking and entering is ten years\u2019 imprisonment. G.S. 14-54. The sentence imposed in this case does not exceed the statutory maximum.\nIt has been held time after time that \u201c(w)hen punishment does not exceed the limits fixed by the statute, it cannot be considered cruel and unusual punishment in a constitutional sense.\u201d State v. Davis, 267 N.C. 126, 147 S.E. 2d 570. State v. Reed, 4 N.C. App. 109, 165 S.E. 2d 674.\nIn the trial, we find\nNo error.\nMallabd, C.J., and Moeeis, J., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Campbell, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Robert Morgan and Deputy Attorney General Harry W. McGalliard for the State.",
      "W. H. McMillan for defendant appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. JERRY OSCAR PERRYMAN\nNo. 6922SC196\n(Filed 28 May 1969)\n1. Burglary and Unlawful Breakings \u00a7 8\u2014 felonious breaking and entering \u2014 punishment\nThe maximum punishment for the felony of breaking and entering is ten years\u2019 imprisonment G-.S. 14-54.\n2. Constitutional Law \u00a7 86\u2014 cruel and unusual punishment\nPunishment within the statutory maximum is not cruel and unusual in the constitutional sense.\nAppeal by defendant from Seay, J., December 1968 Session, Ike-bell County Superior Court.\nJerry Oscar Perryman (defendant) was charged in a proper bill of indictment with- the felony of breaking and entering a building occupied by Niemand Industries, a corporation in Iredell County, a violation of G.S. 14-54.\nDefendant, an indigent, was represented by court-appointed counsel. After the defendant was questioned extensively by the trial judge as to his understanding of the nature of the offense, his opportunity to confer with counsel and his knowledge of the offense charged and the punishment therefor under the statute, the defendant\u2019s plea of guilty as charged was entered in open court. After making this inquiry of the defendant in open court, the trial judge found as a fact that the defendant\u2019s plea was freely, understanding^ and voluntarily made, and that the plea was made without undue influence, compulsion or duress and without promise of leniency.\nFrom the imposition of a prison sentence of not less than five years nor more than eight years, the defendant appealed to this Court. Counsel was appointed by the trial court to represent the defendant on the appeal. The county was ordered to defray all of the expenses incurred in connection with the appeal.\nAttorney General Robert Morgan and Deputy Attorney General Harry W. McGalliard for the State.\nW. H. McMillan for defendant appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0684-01",
  "first_page_order": 704,
  "last_page_order": 705
}