{
  "id": 8551316,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. RONALD MOSS THOMPSON",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Thompson",
  "decision_date": "1970-05-27",
  "docket_number": "No. 7019SC265",
  "first_page": "313",
  "last_page": "315",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "8 N.C. App. 313"
    }
  ],
  "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": "73 S.E. 162",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "157 N.C. 624",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8659506
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/157/0624-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 331,
    "char_count": 5335,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.598,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.527646540942415e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3479417139763747
    },
    "sha256": "335a5364135fcbdb85c85cf95896f4197cc87bdc4e35caec67dac87dae9e9ad0",
    "simhash": "1:d3c725b1c0ab949b",
    "word_count": 891
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:36:14.673474+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Campbell and Paricer, JJ., concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. RONALD MOSS THOMPSON"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "VaughN, J.\nThe defendant contends that the trial court committed error by overruling the defendant\u2019s motion for nonsuit entered at the close of all the evidence. The defendant contends that \u201cthe State did not introduce evidence tending to negative knowledge or intent on the part of the owner\u201d and therefore, the State failed to prove felonious intent to steal. There is no merit to this contention. Suffice to say that the record is replete with evidence tending to show a present intent on the part of the defendant to take property belonging to another and convert it to his own use. The defendant relies on State v. Goffney, 157 N.C. 624, 73 S.E. 162, which we find to be inapplicable to the case at bar. There the entry was found to be a lawful one as the owner of the premises gave the defendant permission to enter. The entry was with the consent and at the instance of the owner. Such permission or consent does not appear from the evidence of this case. The motion for nonsuit was properly overruled.\nThe defendant further contends that error was committed by the admission of the testimony of Lieutenant H. E. Tucker, over the defendant\u2019s objection, for the purpose of corroborating the testimony of the State\u2019s witnesses. The defendant vigorously asserts that the testimony of the State\u2019s witnesses was not definite or exact as to the date nor time of the alleged robbery and the testimony of the police officer, which was of \u201cconvincing assurance,\u201d should not be allowed to bolster this evidence. Evidence which tends to corroborate a party\u2019s witnesses is competent, and is properly admitted upon the trial for that purpose. 7 Strong, N.C. Index 2d, Witnesses, \u00a7 5, p. 696. The court instructed the jury that Tucker\u2019s testimony was being allowed into evidence solely for the purpose of corroborating the State\u2019s witnesses and that it was for the jury to decide whether the evidence was in fact corroborative. The testimony was properly admitted and the objection is without merit.\nIn the trial below we find\nNo error.\nCampbell and Paricer, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "VaughN, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Robert Morgan by Staff Attorney James L. Blackburn for the State.",
      "Clarence E. Horton, Jr., for defendant appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. RONALD MOSS THOMPSON\nNo. 7019SC265\n(Filed 27 May 1970)\n1. Burglary and Unlawful Breakings \u00a7 5; Larceny \u00a7 7\u2014 felonious intent \u2014 sufficiency of evidence\nIn a prosecution charging defendant with felonious breaking and entering and with larceny, State\u2019s evidence that around midnight the defendant and a companion broke the glass door of a hardware store and took away guns and ammunition held sufficient to show a present intent on the part of defendant to take property belonging to another and convert it to his own use.\n2. Witnesses \u00a7 7\u2014 corroborative testimony\nEvidence which tends to corroborate a party\u2019s witness is competent and is properly admitted upon the trial for that purpose.\n3. Criminal Law \u00a7 89\u2014 corroborative testimony \u2014 admissibility\nTestimony of a police officer was admissible to corroborate the testimony of the State\u2019s witnesses relating to a robbery, and there is no merit to defendant\u2019s contention that the evidence should have been excluded on the ground that the State\u2019s witnesses were indefinite as to the date and time of the robbery while the officer\u2019s testimony was of \u201cconvincing assurance.\u201d\nAppeal by defendant from Martin, Robert M., S.J., October 1969 Session, Cabaebtts Superior Court.\nDefendant was tried upon a bill of indictment, proper in form, charging him with felonious breaking and entering and larceny. There was an accompanying charge of receiving which was not pursued by the State. The defendant, through his court-appointed attorney, entered a plea of not guilty to each count.\nEvidence presented by the State tended to show that the defendant and three others were riding in an automobile driven by Steven Finger in Kannapolis, N. C., on 13 January 1969 and that at about midnight they parked near the Centerview Hardware Store. The defendant and Sam Cruse broke the glass in the front door of the store and took guns and ammunition. The property was put in the trunk of Finger\u2019s automobile. Finger took his three passengers to the Bethel section of Kannapolis whereupon the defendant, David Lee Higgins, and Cruse removed the stolen property from the trunk. This evidence was related in testimony by Steven Finger and David Lee Higgins and was corroborated by the testimony of Lieutenant H. E. Tucker of the Kannapolis Police Department. The State offered the testimony of W. B. Moore, the owner-operator of Centerview Hardware, who testified that he was informed of the robbery by the Kan-napolis Police Department and thereafter went to his store and observed the condition of the front door and made a list of missing property of the value of $650.40.\nThe defendant offered the testimony of Odessa Moss, the defendant\u2019s grandmother with whom he lived, -who stated that each night she rises to let her grandson in and that on the night of this occurrence he came home at ten minutes past midnight.\nThe jury returned a verdict of guilty on both counts as charged in the bill of indictment. From the judgment entered and sentence-imposed of seven (7) to ten (10) years for breaking and entering and seven (7) to ten (10) years for larceny, the defendant appeals.\nAttorney General Robert Morgan by Staff Attorney James L. Blackburn for the State.\nClarence E. Horton, Jr., for defendant appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0313-01",
  "first_page_order": 337,
  "last_page_order": 339
}
