{
  "id": 8597576,
  "name": "STATE v. MRS. JOHN TURPIN and FRANK SHERRILL",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Turpin",
  "decision_date": "1932-06-15",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "11",
  "last_page": "12",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "203 N.C. 11"
    }
  ],
  "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": "114 S. E., 314",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "184 N. C., 694",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11272101
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/184/0694-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "114 S. E., 851",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "184 N. C., 768",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11272345
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/184/0768-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 145,
    "char_count": 1601,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.455,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.714603279856598e-08,
      "percentile": 0.35855642549044364
    },
    "sha256": "0bc2ecaf1004fb35fdedbd43dd9e7300cdd608b5e9390590b45965c72219dbe9",
    "simhash": "1:a727df18572f233f",
    "word_count": 256
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:49:40.426370+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. MRS. JOHN TURPIN and FRANK SHERRILL."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Stacy, C. J.\nThe evidence respecting the reputation of defendant\u2019s garage for selling liquor was hearsay and should have been excluded. S. v. Springs, 184 N. C., 768, 114 S. E., 851; S. v. Mills, 184 N. C., 694, 114 S. E., 314. The identical question was before the Court in the two cases just cited. Further discussion would only call for a repetition of what was said in these cases.\nNew trial.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Stacy, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney-General Brummitt and Assistant Attorney-General Sea/well for the State.",
      "I. 0. Crawford and Edwards & Leatherwood for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. MRS. JOHN TURPIN and FRANK SHERRILL.\n(Filed 15 June, 1932.)\nCriminal Law G e \u2014 Evidence of reputation of defendant\u2019s garage for selling liquor held incompetent as hearsay evidence.\nIn a prosecution for violation of the prohibition laws evidence that the defendant\u2019s garage had the reputation of selling liquor is incompetent as hearsay evidence.\nAppeal by defendant, Mrs. John Turpin, from Harding, J., at July-August Term, 1931, of SwaiN.\nCriminal prosecution tried upon indictment charging the defendant, and another, with violations of the prohibition laws.\nLee Birchfield, a character witness for Mrs. Turpin, was asked on cross-examination the following question:\n\u201cQ. What is the reputation of the defendant\u2019s home in regard to selling liquor? (Objection; overruled; exception.) A. That is the reputation of that filling station, it bas been liquor. I don\u2019t know I could buy whiskey there for sure, but I have got some reports on the filling-station.\u201d\nFrom an adverse verdict and judgment of six months in jail, the defendant appeals, assigning errors.\nAttorney-General Brummitt and Assistant Attorney-General Sea/well for the State.\nI. 0. Crawford and Edwards & Leatherwood for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0011-01",
  "first_page_order": 79,
  "last_page_order": 80
}