{
  "id": 8552533,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. NEALY J. LESLIE",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Leslie",
  "decision_date": "1979-06-19",
  "docket_number": "No. 7920SC211",
  "first_page": "81",
  "last_page": "82",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "42 N.C. App. 81"
    }
  ],
  "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": "56 S.E. 2d 574",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1949,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "231 N.C. 214",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8629116
      ],
      "year": 1949,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "215-16"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/231/0214-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 174,
    "char_count": 2468,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.776,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.497341544922815e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3997460855825957
    },
    "sha256": "6249848af575ab2e7624e7a4faef3efee40661e3ac1035befa9c1846cef6d440",
    "simhash": "1:a50925943e91b1ec",
    "word_count": 396
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:00:09.609845+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges Clark and Carlton concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. NEALY J. LESLIE"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "VAUGHN, Judge.\nDefendant was indicted for the murder of his wife and convicted of voluntary manslaughter. There was ample evidence to have supported a verdict of a higher degree of homicide. We must, nevertheless, order a new trial because the jury was not properly instructed on a possible verdict of involuntary manslaughter as it related to defendant\u2019s evidence.\nIt is the duty of the judge to declare and explain the law arising on all of the evidence including that of the defendant even though it appears to be incredible. There was evidence which, if believed, would have permitted the jury to find that the killing was caused by defendant\u2019s culpable negligence in the handling of a loaded shotgun. Under the court\u2019s instructions, however, the jury could have returned a verdict of involuntary manslaughter only if it found that the killing proximately resulted from defendant\u2019s commission of an unlawful act not amounting to a felony. .\n\u201cInvoluntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being unintentionally and without malice but proximately resulting from the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to a felony, or some act done in an unlawful or culpably negligent manner . . . .\u201d State v. Williams, 231 N.C. 214, 215-16, 56 S.E. 2d 574 (1949). (Emphasis added.)\nFor the reason stated, defendant is entitled to a new trial.\nNew trial.\nJudges Clark and Carlton concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "VAUGHN, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Edmisten, by Assistant Attorney General George J. Oliver, for the State.",
      "Van Camp, Gill and Crumpler, by James R. Van Camp, for defendant appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. NEALY J. LESLIE\nNo. 7920SC211\n(Filed 19 June 1979)\nHomicide \u00a7 30.3\u2014 failure to instruct on involuntary manslaughter as related to defendant\u2019s evidence\nThe trial court in a homicide case erroneously failed to instruct the jury on a possible verdict of involuntary manslaughter as it related to defendant\u2019s evidence where the court\u2019s instructions permitted the jury to return a verdict of involuntary manslaughter only if it found that the killing proximately resulted from defendant\u2019s commission of an unlawful act not amounting to a felony, but defendant presented evidence which, if believed, would have permitted the jury to find that the killing was caused by defendant\u2019s culpable negligence in the handling of a loaded shotgun.\nAPPEAL by defendant from Mills, Judge. Judgment entered 6 October 1978 in Superior Court, MOORE County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 24 May 1979.\nAttorney General Edmisten, by Assistant Attorney General George J. Oliver, for the State.\nVan Camp, Gill and Crumpler, by James R. Van Camp, for defendant appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0081-01",
  "first_page_order": 109,
  "last_page_order": 110
}