{
  "id": 8653931,
  "name": "STATE v. ALVIN DOVE",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Dove",
  "decision_date": "1925-03-04",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "248",
  "last_page": "249",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "189 N.C. 248"
    }
  ],
  "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": "89 N. C., 482",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "181 N. C., 527",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8657364
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/181/0527-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "111 N. C., 638",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8651959
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/111/0638-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 114,
    "char_count": 1116,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.471,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.518461695170957e-08,
      "percentile": 0.28340938023799844
    },
    "sha256": "b0be964917f3a8bd44603c103045e6dcd1bbd20ec4748aed25872de0b663406e",
    "simhash": "1:5c30556a602cb076",
    "word_count": 192
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:40:32.095485+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. ALVIN DOVE."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Pee Oueiam.\nTbe defendant was indicted for transporting intoxicating liquor in -violation of law. Tbe verdict was returned in tbe afternoon and wben tbe court reconvened tbe next morning tbe defendant sought to impeach tbe verdict by a statement of one of tbe jurors who was contradicted by all tbe others. In S. v. Best, 111 N. C., 638, tbe Court said: \u201cWe find ourselves concluded by tbe authority of an established and long-settled rule based upon tbe wisest reasons of public policy, that a juror should not be permitted to impeach bis own conduct in tbe rendition of a verdict.\u201d S. v. Hall, 181 N. C., 527; S. v. Brittain, 89 N. C., 482.\nTbe motion to dismiss was properly refused.\nWe find\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Pee Oueiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney-General Brummitt and Assistant Attorney-General Nash for the State.",
      "George T. Willis, B. H. Willis and Henry A. Tolson for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. ALVIN DOVE.\n(Filed 4 March, 1925.)\nVerdict \u2014 Jurors\u2014Impeachment of Verdict.\nAfter the rendition of the verdict, the verdict may not be impeached by the testimony of one of the jurors.\nAppeal by defendant from Midyette, J., at September Term, 1924, of CRAVEN.\nAttorney-General Brummitt and Assistant Attorney-General Nash for the State.\nGeorge T. Willis, B. H. Willis and Henry A. Tolson for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0248-01",
  "first_page_order": 326,
  "last_page_order": 327
}