{
  "id": 8627403,
  "name": "STATE v. BENNIE GRIFFIN",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Griffin",
  "decision_date": "1932-04-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "517",
  "last_page": "518",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "202 N.C. 517"
    }
  ],
  "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": "201 N. C., 620",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8627240
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/201/0620-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "201 N. C., 541",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8626681
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/201/0541-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "149 N. C., 559",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11271511
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/149/0559-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "201 N. C., 808",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8628308
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/201/0808-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "201 N. C., 620",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8627240
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/201/0620-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 140,
    "char_count": 2229,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.465,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.45175759174425e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3980131660185594
    },
    "sha256": "8704ae103b9d1449b4c7b10e7e4aca163d28ee1baac8469b5ae5012ec8278ead",
    "simhash": "1:ecf2b15976267789",
    "word_count": 393
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:38:17.445618+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. BENNIE GRIFFIN."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "CoNNOR, J.\nTbe order denying tbe motion of tbe defendant for a new trial on tbe ground of newly discovered evidence, beard in tbe Superior Court of Orange County at tbe term next succeeding tbe affirmance by tbis Court of tbe judgment of said Court at tbe trial term, is not subject to review on appeal to tbis Court. Tbis appeal is, therefore, dismissed. S. v. Cox, ante, 378. Tbe order was made by tbe judge of tbe Superior Court in tbe exercise of bis judicial discretion. S. v. Oasey, 201 N. C., 620. It involves no matter of law or legal inference. It is conclusive. Goodman v. Goodman, 201 N. C., 808, S. v. Branner, 149 N. C., 559.\nDismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "CoNNOR, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney-General Brummitt and Assistant Attorney-General Seawell for the State.",
      "M. Hugh Thompson and O. J. Gates for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. BENNIE GRIFFIN.\n(Filed 6 April, 1932.)\nCriminal Law L e \u2014 No appeal will lie from order of trial court refusing motion for new trial for newly discovered evidence.\n- A motion for a new trial for newly discovered evidence, made at the next \u25a0 succeeding term of criminal court after affirmance of the former conviction by the Supreme Court, is addressed to the discretion of the trial court, and his order refusing to grant the motion is not reviewable, and an appeal therefrom will be dismissed. \u25a0\nAppeal by defendant from Daniels, J., at December Term, 1931, of ORANGE.\nDismissed.\nThe defendant in this action was tried at June Term, 1931, of the Superior Court of Orange County, on an indictment of murder. He was convicted of murder in the first degree, and appealed from the judgment on such conviction to the Supreme Court, assigning errors at the trial. The appeal was heard by the Supreme Court at its Fall Term, 1931. The assignments of error were not sustained. The judgment was affirmed. S, v. Griffin, 201 N. C., 541.\nAt the December Term, 1931, of the Superior Court of Orange County, which was the first term of said court held after the affirmance by the Supreme Court of the judgment at June Term, 1931, the defendant moved for a new trial in said court for newly discovered evidence.\nThe motion was heard (S. v. Casey, 201 N. C., 620) and denied. From the order denying his motion, the defendant appealed to the Supreme Court.\nAttorney-General Brummitt and Assistant Attorney-General Seawell for the State.\nM. Hugh Thompson and O. J. Gates for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0517-01",
  "first_page_order": 583,
  "last_page_order": 584
}