{
  "id": 8654898,
  "name": "STATE v. COLUMBUS JONES, et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Jones",
  "decision_date": "1896-02",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "1237",
  "last_page": "1239",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "118 N.C. 1237"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "5 Jones N. C., 9",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Jones",
      "case_ids": [
        11276089
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/50/0009-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "86 N. C., 603",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11274991
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/86/0603-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "65 N. C., 334",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        1955352
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/65/0334-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "5 Jones N. C., 9",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Jones",
      "case_ids": [
        11276089
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/50/0009-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 279,
    "char_count": 5097,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.485,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.2076331477240565
    },
    "sha256": "8b46c0986e11ef8df9a151ead9de25e35f2219097d68116e10b2722a2e09afa0",
    "simhash": "1:d4dbed78cdd3548d",
    "word_count": 902
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:26:06.557243+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. COLUMBUS JONES, et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Furches, J.:\nIndictment for.assault and battery with a deadly weapon on one Jenkins. The court charged the jury, among other things, \u201c that il at Minnie Moose\u2019s house Jones and Tingle got off their- horses and advanced upon Jenkins, cursing him, and with the intention of fighting him, and Jenkins, in order to save himself from being beaten, ran off, they would be guilty.\u201d\n\u201cIf these three men all pursued Jenkins to his home with weapons, cursing him, and refusing to leave when ordered off by him, they would be guilty.\u201d\n\u201c If-the jury believe from the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Tingle and Mask were then present at Jenkins\u2019 house, telling Jones what to say to him, to call him a mill-burner, &c., they would be guilty.\u2019.\u2019 Defendants excepted.\nThe two first paragraphs of the charge seem to be authorized by State v. Rawles, 65 N. C., 334; and the last paragraph by State v. King, 86 N. C., 603, and State v. Perry, 5 Jones, 9. The judgment is\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Furches, J.:"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "The Attorney General, for the State.",
      "No counsel, oontra."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. COLUMBUS JONES, et al.\nAssault with Deadly Weapon \u2014 Instructions.\nWhere, in the trial of an indictment for assault and battery, the court charged (1) that, if at M.\u2019s house, J. and L. (two of the defendants) got off their horses and advanced upon prosecutor, cursing him, and with intention of fighting him,\u2019 and prosecutor ran, in order to save himself from being beaten, they would he guilty ; likewise (2) if they all pursued J. to his house with weapons, cursing him and refusing to leave when ordered off by him ; and (3) if the jury believe, from the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that defendants L. and M. (two of the defendants) were then present at prosecutor\u2019s house telling J. what to say to him, to call him a mill-burner, &c., defendants will be guilty ; Held, that such instructions were proper and authorized, the first two by State v. Hawles, 65 N. 0., 334, and the last by State v. King, 86 N. 0., 603, and State v. Perry, 5 Jones N. C., 9.\nINDICTMENT, for assault with deadly weapons, tried before Bryan, J., at Fall Term, 1895, of Caldwell Superior Court.\nIt appeared from the evidence that about dusk, on a certain evening, the defendants Jones, Ringle and Mask, went to the house of one Minnie Moose; that defendant Jenkins was sitting in the door when they arrived. Jones said: \u201cGood evening Jim,\u201d meaning Jenkins, \u201care you at home ? \u201d Jenkins replied, \u201c I\u2019m at home whenever I have njy hat on.\u201d Jones said, \u201c You were not at home the other night when you cut me, aud God damn you, step out and we will settle it.\u201d Jones rode a mare that had a colt with her. Ringle was riding a stud-horse and Mask a mule. \"When Jones made the last of the above remarks, he and Ringle dismounted for the purpose, Jones said, of fighting Jenkins, and started towards Jenkins (Jones turning his mare loose and Ringle giving his stud horse to Mask to hold). Jenkins ran out of the back door and through swamp to his house, which was about a quarter of a mile off. Jones, Ringle and Mask followed, cursing him, but claimed to be hunting the mare of Jones \u2014there was evidence that she had gone in that direction. Jenkins got home. It was in evidence that Jones said he would kill him or die; would put him where some of his brothers were (that is, dead). Jenkins got home, got his gun and stepped out. Crowd halloed, and Jenkins answered \u201c Whoopee ! \u201d\nWitness, John Poplin, testified: Jones said he was hunting his mare and Jenkins, too. Jenkins told him to leave his premises. Jones cursed him. Heard seven shots fired. This witness further testified that Jenkins shot twice and before anybody else. They appeared to be coming together. When Jenkins asked for his gun the crowd seemed to be coming towards the house.\nJenkins testified that Jones and Ringle were both armed when they advanced on him at Minnie Moose\u2019s house. He further testified that Jones and the other two, Ringle and Mask, were on his premises, that he ordered them off. That Jones called him u a d \u2014 n cowardly son of a bitch \u201d and \u201c mill-burning son of a bitch.\u201d Jeukins testified further that he shot at them because they were going to kill him. There was evidence that Ringle stood by Jones and told him to call Jenkins a \u201c mill-burner.\u201d Ringle and Jones were both wounded.\nThe court charged the jury, among other things : \u201c That if at Minnie Moose\u2019s house Jones and Ringle got off their horse's and advanced upon Jenkins with the intention of fighting him and cursing him, and Jenkins, in order to save himself from being beaten, ran off, they would be guilty. If these three men all pursued Jenkins to his home with weapons, cursing him and refusing to leave when ordered off by him, they would be guilty.\n\u201c If the jury believe from the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, thatLingle and Mask were then present at Jenkin\u2019s house, telling Jones what to say to him, to call him a \u00a3 mill-burner, etc.,\u2019 they would be guilty.\u201d\nTo this charge Tingle and Jones excepted.\nThe defendants moved for a new trial. Motion overruled. Judgment and appeal by defendants, Jones and Tingle.\nThe Attorney General, for the State.\nNo counsel, oontra."
  },
  "file_name": "1237-01",
  "first_page_order": 1273,
  "last_page_order": 1275
}