{
  "id": 8551267,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. BILLY LEWIS ROBINSON and MARY LOU BROOKS",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Robinson",
  "decision_date": "1970-09-16",
  "docket_number": "No. 7021SC487",
  "first_page": "433",
  "last_page": "435",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "9 N.C. App. 433"
    }
  ],
  "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": "33 S.E. 2d 136",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "225 N.C. 13",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8597368
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/225/0013-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "52 S.E. 2d 346",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "230 N.C. 172",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8628976
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/230/0172-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "85 S.E. 2d 148",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1954,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "241 N.C. 277",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8607464
      ],
      "year": 1954,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/241/0277-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 308,
    "char_count": 4438,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.537,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.89950402824256e-08,
      "percentile": 0.306872910351144
    },
    "sha256": "f5ad586a5984306785899981626e0f49da9ab5fbdc68fbec9d78bf0e09fa4b9f",
    "simhash": "1:4ddf07f4e4e0901b",
    "word_count": 737
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:50:15.842675+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Mallard, C.J., and Parker, J., concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. BILLY LEWIS ROBINSON and MARY LOU BROOKS"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Hedrick, J.\nThe defendants assign as error the court\u2019s refusal to allow their motions for judgments as of nonsuit.\nThe only evidence before the court and jury was that offered by the State which tended to establish the following facts: The defendant Robinson separated himself from his wife in December 1969, and during the month of January 1970 he was residing in a trailer at Kanoy Trailer Park, Kernersville, Forsyth County, North Carolina. Three witnesses for the State testified that on 27 January 1970 they went to the defendant Robinson\u2019s trailer between the hours of 9:00 and 10:00 p.m. where they saw the defendants Robinson and Brooks in bed together. These witnesses testified that they saw a lady\u2019s robe thrown across a chair in the living room, and that food was cooking on the stove, and the dining table had been set for two people.\nEmily Carol Robinson testified that she saw the defendant Brooks getting into Robinson\u2019s blue Corvair at Triad Manufacturing Company, where the defendants worked, three or four weeks prior to the date she saw them in bed together in the trailer and, also, on 27 January 1970 she saw a prescription bottle in the trailer bearing the name of Mary Lou Brooks, and on the same occasion she saw a pair of women\u2019s boots in the defendant Robinson\u2019s blue Corvair.\nMrs. Charles Bryant, who resided in the Kanoy Trailer Park, testified that she saw the defendant Brooks go to Robinson\u2019s trailer on three separate occasions, in the nighttime, in the month of January 1970 and remain inside the defendant Robinson\u2019s trailer for approximately three hours on each occasion.\nThe defendants contend that the evidence tends to show only a single act of illicit sexual intercourse, and that such is not a violation of G.S. 14-184.\nIn State v. Kleiman, 241 N.C. 277, 85 S.E. 2d 148 (1954), Bobbitt, J., now C.J., summarized the North Carolina law with respect to this statute as follows:\n\u201cA single act of illicit sexual intercourse is not fornication and adultery as defined by G.S. 14-184, S. v. Ivey, 230 N.C. 172, 52 S.E. 2d 346; for, as stated in S. v. Davenport, 225 N.C. 13, 33 S.E. 2d 136, \u2018 \u201cLewdly and lasciviously cohabit\u201d plainly implies habitual intercourse, in the manner of husband and wife, and together with the fact of not being married to each other, constitutes the offense, and in plain words draws the distinction between single or non-habitual intercourse and the offense the statute means to denounce.\u2019\n\u201cBut, as stated further by Seawell, J., in the opinion in the Davenport case: \u2018It is never essential to conviction that even a single act of illicit sexual intercourse be proven by direct testimony. While necessary to a conviction that such acts must have occurred, it is, nevertheless, competent to infer them from the circumstances presented in the evidence. . . .\u201d\nIn the instant case the evidence tended to show some association between the defendants for a period of three or four weeks. Evidence that the feme\u25a0 defendant was seen to enter and remain in the male defendant\u2019s living quarters for approximately three hours in the nighttime on three separate occasions in the month of January 1970 must be considered in connection with the evidence of what occurred in the male defendant\u2019s trailer on the night of 27 January 1970 and, when so considered, we hold the evidence sufficient to carry the case to the jury. State v. Kleiman, supra.\nThe judgments are affirmed.\nAffirmed.\nMallard, C.J., and Parker, J., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Hedrick, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Robert Morgan, Attorney General, by James L. Blackburn, for the State.",
      "Morgan, Byerly, Post and Keziah, by W. B. Byerly, Jr., for the defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. BILLY LEWIS ROBINSON and MARY LOU BROOKS\nNo. 7021SC487\n(Filed 16 September 1970)\nFornication and Adultery \u00a7 4\u2014 sufficiency of evidence\nIn a prosecution charging defendants with fornication and adultery in violation of G.S. 14-184, the State\u2019s evidence was sufficient to carry issue of defendants\u2019 guilt to the jury.\nAppeal by defendants from Armstrong, J., 20 April 1970 Session, Forsyth Superior Court.\nThe defendants, Billy Lewis Robinson (Robinson), and Mary Lou Brooks (Brooks), were charged in warrants, proper in form, with fornication and adultery in violation of G.S. 14-184. The cases were consolidated for trial and the defendants pleaded not guilty. The jury found each defendant guilty as charged. From judgments entered on the verdicts, the defendants appealed to this Court.\nRobert Morgan, Attorney General, by James L. Blackburn, for the State.\nMorgan, Byerly, Post and Keziah, by W. B. Byerly, Jr., for the defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0433-01",
  "first_page_order": 457,
  "last_page_order": 459
}
