{
  "id": 8554255,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JAMES SUMNER LEE",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Lee",
  "decision_date": "1970-06-24",
  "docket_number": "No. 7011SC104",
  "first_page": "601",
  "last_page": "602",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "8 N.C. App. 601"
    }
  ],
  "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": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 131,
    "char_count": 1844,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.591,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.8591662004228935e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3669422425786214
    },
    "sha256": "ee29aa752dbcf11051ba8da7fd867ddeabfbb2126fdd3d015788dba026e11364",
    "simhash": "1:1ee9471ff1d0c5f6",
    "word_count": 315
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:36:14.673474+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Britt, J., concurs.",
      "Graham, J., dissents."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JAMES SUMNER LEE"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "BROCK, J.\nWe have examined G.S. 14-409 and the warrant under which defendant was charged in this case, and we agree with the ruling of the trial judge.\nAffirmed.\nBritt, J., concurs.\nGraham, J., dissents.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "BROCK, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Morgan, by Staff Attorney Jacobs for the State.",
      "No appearance for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JAMES SUMNER LEE\nNo. 7011SC104\n(Filed 24 June 1970)\nWeapons and Firearms\u2014 machine gun, submachine gun or like weapon\nWeapon described in a warrant as \u201ca Universal Caliber 30 Ml Carbine, Serial No. 135258, capable of firing thirty-one (31) shots, by successive pulling of the trigger\u201d is not a \u201cmachine gun, submachine gun or other like weapon\u201d within the meaning of G.S. 14-409.\nGkaham, J., dissents.\nAppeal by the State from McKinnon, J., 27 October 1969 Session, Lee Superior Court.\nDefendant was charged in a warrant with the unlawful possession of a machine gun or sub-machine gun or other like weapon, to wit: a Universal Caliber 30 Ml Carbine, Serial No. 135258, capable of firing thirty-one (31) shots, by the successive pulling of the trigger. G.S. 14-409. The offense was alleged to have occurred on or about 2 September 1969. Defendant was tried in District Court on 9 September 1969, and from a verdict of guilty appealed to the Superior Court for trial de novo.\n\u25a0 When the case was called for trial in Superior Court on 28 October 1969, defendant moved to quash the warrant because: (1) the weapon described in the warrant was not such a weapon as was covered by the statute; and (2) as applied to defendant the statute (G.S. 14-409) was void for vagueness. The trial judge ruled that the weapon as described in the warrant was not a \u201cmachine gun, sub-machine gun or other like weapon\u201d within the meaning of G.S. 14-409. Based upon this ruling the trial judge quashed the warrant, an^; the. State appealed.\nAttorney General Morgan, by Staff Attorney Jacobs for the State.\nNo appearance for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0601-01",
  "first_page_order": 625,
  "last_page_order": 626
}