{
  "id": 8655397,
  "name": "STATE v. NEAL DISON",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Dison",
  "decision_date": "1924-04-09",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "854",
  "last_page": "855",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "187 N.C. 854"
    }
  ],
  "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": "86 N. C., 658",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11275297
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/86/0658-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "186 N. C., 627",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8654369
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/186/0627-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 121,
    "char_count": 1170,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.455,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20763990487476297
    },
    "sha256": "a9cfbbaf0f72bf05b0d3d0ae4d58e61c2e3366c511cf709a3268e118ac35f2d5",
    "simhash": "1:8965c8a716ff9c52",
    "word_count": 204
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:05:52.896945+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. NEAL DISON."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe only exception presented on the record is the one directed to the refusal of the trial court to grant the defendant\u2019s motion for dismissal of the action or for judgment as of nonsuit, made under C. S., 4643, after the State had produced its evidence and rested its case. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, the accepted position on a motion of this kind, we think the trial court was justified in submitting the case to the jury, and that the verdict is supported by the evidence.\nNo benefit would be derived from detailing the testimony, as the only question before us is whether it is sufficient to carry the case to the jury, and we think it is. S. v. Williams, 186 N. C., 627; S. v. Massey, 86 N. C., 658.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney-General Manning and Assistant Attorney-General Nash for the State.",
      "J. H. Folger for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. NEAL DISON.\n(Filed 9 April, 1924.)\nAppeal by defendant from Lane, J., at October Term, 1923, of Sueey.\nCriminal prosecution, tried upon an indictment charging defendant with an assault with intent to commit rape.\nFrom an adverse verdict, and judgment pronounced thereon, the defendant appeals.\nAttorney-General Manning and Assistant Attorney-General Nash for the State.\nJ. H. Folger for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0854-02",
  "first_page_order": 924,
  "last_page_order": 925
}