{
  "id": 11273180,
  "name": "STATE v. JOHN STACKHOUSE",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Stackhouse",
  "decision_date": "1910-04-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "808",
  "last_page": "808",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "152 N.C. 808"
    }
  ],
  "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": "116 N. C., 1033",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8656077
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/116/1033-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "117 N. C., 834",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8654160
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/117/0834-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "115 N. C., 790",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "118 N. C., 1145",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8654669
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/118/1145-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "118 N. C., 1113",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8654642
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/118/1113-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 162,
    "char_count": 1915,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.452,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.3061430802636296e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6233863441459329
    },
    "sha256": "ef8bfacc45ae4382829db62b98267e941dcca1e90ee9342d00ac154793e85c5b",
    "simhash": "1:472126007416dc6a",
    "word_count": 331
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:29:47.463636+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. JOHN STACKHOUSE."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Brown, J.\nThe prisoner was convicted of the premeditated and deliberate murder of his wife. The killing with a deadly weapon, a shotgun, was admitted. There are no exceptions to the evidence.\nThe only assignments of error relate to the charge of the judge upon the question of premeditation.\nWe have examined the entire record with the care which the importance of the case deserves, and we have weighed the well-considered argument of the learned counsel for the prisoner. We are compelled to say that we find no merit in the exceptions pressed so earnestly upon our attention. His Honor followed accurately the well-settled principles laid down by this Court in numerous cases as to what constitutes deliberation and premeditation, and we think it is needless to repeat them here. S. v. Thomas, 118 N. C., 1113; S. v. Dowden, 118 N. C., 1145; S. v. Norwood, 115 N. C., 790; S. v. Covington, 117 N. C., 834; S. v. McCormac, 116 N. C., 1033.\nIt is true, the provocation which led to the crime was such that it induced the jury to attach to their verdict a recommendation for mercy. That is'4 a matter for the consideration of the Chief Executive of the State.\nIn the rulings of the court below we find\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Brown, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney-General for the State.",
      "Gox & Dunn for prisoner."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. JOHN STACKHOUSE.\n(Filed 6 April, 1910.)\nMurder \u2014 Verdict\u2014Recommendation for Mercy \u2014 Appeal and Error.\nA recommendation for mercy by the jury in their verdict of guilty of murder is not considered on appeal, b.ut is a matter for the Chief Executive, and the lower court having accurately followed in this ease the precedents established by this Court upon the questions of deliberation and premeditation, no error is found.\nAppeal from W. J. Adams, J., at November Term, 1909, of SCOTLAND.\nIndictment for murder. The prisoner was convicted of murder in tbe first degree, and from the judgment and sentence of-death appeals to this Court.\nAttorney-General for the State.\nGox & Dunn for prisoner."
  },
  "file_name": "0808-01",
  "first_page_order": 856,
  "last_page_order": 856
}