{ "id": 11274897, "name": "STATE v. FLEMMING", "name_abbreviation": "State v. Flemming", "decision_date": "1902-05-20", "docket_number": "", "first_page": "688", "last_page": "690", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "130 N.C. 688" } ], "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": "125 N. C., 730", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 11275375 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/125/0730-01" ] }, { "cite": "110 N. C., 536", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "98 N. C., 773", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 11276338 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/98/0773-01" ] }, { "cite": "93 N. C., 564", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 11274681 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/93/0564-01" ] }, { "cite": "121 N. C., 584", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8653630 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/121/0584-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 275, "char_count": 3683, "ocr_confidence": 0.421, "pagerank": { "raw": 1.6484628240652614e-07, "percentile": 0.6923104397206169 }, "sha256": "7d809579d8f3784b76fb493cf28d2d2634e70b96fc0a08ac08f9f45e1a21860b", "simhash": "1:cf312a3dfe9b5e3d", "word_count": 606 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:31:43.301896+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [], "parties": [ "STATE v. FLEMMING." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "Claee, J.\nThis is an indictment against three negroes for cape upon a white woman, a widow, who, with her little daughter, was living in a house without male protectors. The assailants broke open the door and committed the crime with svery conceivable circumstance of violence and -brutality. The revolting details are narrated with a simplicity and an evident truthfulness thaR make the blood run cold. The only question was as to the identity of the prisoners. The jury, after bearing tbe evidence and tbe defense of able counsel, said for tbeir verdict tbat tbey bad a reasonable doubt as- to the identity of one1 of tbe prisoners, and acquitted him, but that tbey bad none as to tbe other two1.\nThere was exception to evidence -of previous- statements made by the prosecutrix in corroboration of her evidence on tbe stand, also to- evidence which tbe Judge, after admitting over tbe prisoners\u2019 objection, subsequently withdrew and told the jury not to- consider. Both these points have been so often passed upon by the Court tbat no citation of authority is- necessary. State v. Apple, 121 N. C., 584; State v. Coats, at this term; State v. Collins, 93 N. C., 564, and cases there cited.\nTbe confessions in jail were competent, tbe testimony being that there were neither threats nor inducements. State v. Bishop, 98 N. C., 773.\nThe special prayers for instructions by the prisoners (which were principally as to the defense of an alibi) were given, except the prayer that t-he-re was not sufficient evidence to go to- the jury, which was properly refused, and the prayer tbat when circumstantial evidence is relied on \u201cevery link in the chain of evidence must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.\u201d In lieu of this last, the Court instructed the jury; \u201cIn this case, the State relies upon both direct and circumstantial evidence^ and before the State can rely upon circumstantial evidence it is necessary for the State t\u00f3 establish every circumstantial fact upon which it relies, beyond a reasonable doubt.\u201d In this the Court followed exactly the rule-laid down in State v. Crane, 110 N. C., 536, which has since been more fully stated in State v. Shines, 125 N. C., 730.\nHere the prosecutrix testified as to the identity of the two-who were convicted. There- was circumstantial evidence to corroborate her \u2014 such as scratches on the face of one of them the next day after the crime, which were not there the \u25a0day before, tbe identification of bis bat and glove, and other corroborating circumstances.\nAfter a full examination of tbe record we find no error of law committed by tbe Judge, and tbe facts were submitted to the jury with proper and just instructions.\nNo Error.", "type": "majority", "author": "Claee, J." } ], "attorneys": [ "Robert D. Gilmer, Attorney-General, for the State.", "No counsel for defendants." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "STATE v. FLEMMING.\n(Filed May 20, 1902.)\n1. CONFESSIONS \u2014 Evidence.\nConfessions made by accused in jail are competent if there are-neither threats nor inducements made.\n2. EVIDENCE' \u2014 Corroboration\u2014Previous Statements.\nWhere a witness is impeached he may be corroborated by previous statements.\n3. EVIDENCE \u2014 1Withdrawal by Trial Judge \u2014 Harmless Error.\nThe trial judge may correct the admission of improper evidence-by withdrawing it from the jury.\n4. EVIDENCE \u2014 Circumstantial\u2014Instructions\u2014Reasonable Doubt..\nWhere the state relies on circumstantial evidence it must establish every circumstantial fact upon which it relies beyond a reasonable doubt,\nINDICTMENT against Dick Flemming, Ed. Woods1 and Rick-ard Blaton, beard by Judge Thos. J. Bhaw and a jury, at February Term, 1902, of tbe Superior Court of Ro-wan-County. From a verdict of guilty as to Dick Flemming and Rickard Blaton, and judgment thereon, they appealed.\nRobert D. Gilmer, Attorney-General, for the State.\nNo counsel for defendants." }, "file_name": "0688-01", "first_page_order": 726, "last_page_order": 728 }