{
  "id": 8601358,
  "name": "STATE v. WRIGHT BYNUM and WILLIAM RANDALL",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Bynum",
  "decision_date": "1930-09-10",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "376",
  "last_page": "377",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "199 N.C. 376"
    }
  ],
  "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": "198 N. C., 613",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8616289
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/198/0613-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 145,
    "char_count": 1826,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.422,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.2071298365271489
    },
    "sha256": "48d42b58cf556e9c866b955ac071b6e2a026871b122df16a65fa3d2d7f9dcc4e",
    "simhash": "1:d989270501fca4df",
    "word_count": 315
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:48:33.288027+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. WRIGHT BYNUM and WILLIAM RANDALL."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Stacy, C. J\\\nAt the May Term, 1930, Wilson Superior Court, the defendants herein, Wright Bynum and William Bandall, were tried upon an indictment charging them with the murder of one Callie Willi-ford, which resulted in a conviction and sentence of death as to both of the defendants. From the verdict thus rendered and judgment entered thereon, the defendants gave notice of appeal to the Supreme Court, but this has not been perfected as required by the rules, in fact nothing has been done looking to this end.\nAs the attempted appeal is in forma pauperis, and the affidavit for leave to appeal without giving security for costs fails to state, as required by C. S., 4651, that \u201cthe application, is in good faith,\u201d it may be doubted as to whether we have any jurisdiction to hear the matter. S. v. Brumfield, 198 N. C., 613. Nevertheless, as the case is a capital one, we have examined the papers and find no error on the face of the record proper.\nThe motion of the State must be allowed.\nAppeal dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Stacy, C. J\\"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney-General Brummitt and Assistant Attorney-General Nash for the State."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. WRIGHT BYNUM and WILLIAM RANDALL.\n(Filed 10 September, 1930.)\nCriminal Law L a \u2014 Appeal in capital cases will be dismissed for failure to prosecute according to Rules of Court, no errors appearing of record.\nWhether the Supreme Court acquires jurisdiction of an appeal in forma pauperis from a conviction of a capital felony when the affidavit for leave to appeal fails to state, as required by C. S., 4651, that the \u201capplication is in good faith,\u201d queere? and where the appeal has not been prosecuted as required by the Rules of Court the appeal will be dismissed upon the motion of the Attorney-General after an examination of the record proper for errors appearing upon its face.\nMotioN by State to docket and dismiss appeal.\nAttorney-General Brummitt and Assistant Attorney-General Nash for the State."
  },
  "file_name": "0376-01",
  "first_page_order": 444,
  "last_page_order": 445
}