#### THE STATE v. JOHN M. MONGER.

Special Verdict.

A special verdict which simply finds a certain state of facts, without a formal verdict of guilty or not guilty, in accordance with the opinion of the Court given upon the facts found, is incomplete, and will not support a judgment.

This was an appeal from Moore Superior Court, Fall Term, 1890, Graves, J., presiding.

The Attorney General, for the State.

Mr. J. G. Black, for the defendant.

Clark, J.:

The jury have rendered no verdict. They found certain facts to be true, and add: “If, upon the foregoing state of facts, his Honor be of opinion that the defendant is guilty, thén the jury find him guilty; if not, then the jury find him not guilty.” The record then states: “His Honor, upon the foregoing facts, being of the opinion that the defendant is guilty, adjudges that he pay a fine of $25 and costs.” This was doubtless an inadvertence, but the effect is a judgment pronounced without a verdict to support it. State v. Moore, at this term, and cases there cited. Regularly the Court, upon the facts found, should have instructed the jury that their verdict should be “guilty,” or “ not guilty,” and such verdict having been entered up, the *772Court should thereupon have sentenced the prisoner, or have discharged him, as the case might be. From the former judgment the defendant might appeal, and from the latter, the State. The Code, § 1237.

For the reasons given we must declare that there is error. The transcript of the record on appeal was imperfect in not setting out that the Court was held, &c. State v. Butts, 91 N. C., 524. This, however, has been amended by a supplementary record having since been sent'up.

Error.