{ "id": 8630530, "name": "STATE v. GEORGE KEATON", "name_abbreviation": "State v. Keaton", "decision_date": "1934-01-10", "docket_number": "", "first_page": "607", "last_page": "608", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "205 N.C. 607" } ], "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": "35 S. E., 815", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "126 N. C., 465", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8660636 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/126/0465-01" ] }, { "cite": "109 S. E., 31", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "182 N. C., 275", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8655840 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/182/0275-01" ] }, { "cite": "24 N. C., 78", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8685220 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/24/0078-01" ] }, { "cite": "166 S. E., 163", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "203 N. C., 374", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8611261 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/203/0374-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 275, "char_count": 3563, "ocr_confidence": 0.46, "pagerank": { "raw": 2.425464412607034e-07, "percentile": 0.8014355277083722 }, "sha256": "c3e9e4e3cca2f72b5a080079b10d0e7428cc068aea20e6580464f3a559ad48d9", "simhash": "1:fbfa38853c3b850f", "word_count": 602 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:12:31.066060+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [], "parties": [ "STATE v. GEORGE KEATON." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "Stacy, C. J.\nThere is evidence on behalf of the State tending to show that on 19 January, 1933, the prisoner, George Keaton, shot and killed Annie Lee Thigpen under circumstances indicative of a mind fatally bent on mischief and a heart devoid of social duties. The deceased, a girl eighteen years of age, to whom the prisoner was evidently paying court, was on her way home from school when the prisoner, without apparent cause or provocation, shot her three times because \u201cshe had made his life miserable,\u201d he said, and as she pleaded: \u201cPlease don\u2019t shoot me.\u201d\nThe homicide is not denied. The defense interposed on behalf of the prisoner was that of insanity resulting from syphilis in the third or tertiary stage, which \u201caffects every organ in the body, including the brain,\u201d according to one of the physicians. It is further in evidence that syphilis is a common cause of insanity.\nThe prisoner offered Clarence G-illiam as a witness, who testified that he had known the accused for practically two years, having roomed with him, and that he had an opinion, based upon his knowledge and observation of the prisoner, as to whether he was sane or insane on the day of the homicide. Upon objection, the witness was not allowed to state his opinion, which is \u201cthat the prisoner was insane.\u201d Exception.\nWe think this proffered testimony was competent, and its exclusion hurtful. S. v. Jones, 203 N. C., 374, 166 S. E., 163. Any witness who has had opportunity of knowing and observing the character of a person, whose sanity or mental capacity is assailed or brought in question, may not only depose to the facts he knows, hut may also give in evidence his opinion or belief as to the sanity or insanity of the person under review, founded upon such knowledge and observation, and it is for the jurors to ascribe to his testimony that weight and credibility which the intelligence of the witness, his means of knowledge and observation, and all the circumstances attending his testimony, may in their judgment deserve. Clary v. Clary, 24 N. C., 78.\nAnyone who has observed another, or conversed with him, or had dealings with him, and a reasonable opportunity, based thereon, of forming an opinion, satisfactory to himself, as to the mental condition of such person, is permitted to give his opinion in evidence upon the issue of mental capacity, although the witness he not a psychiatrist or expert in mental disorders. White v. Hines, 182 N. C., 275, 109 S. E., 31. \u201cOne not an expert may give an opinion, founded upon observation, that a certain person is sane or insane.\u201d Whitaker v. Hamilton, 126 N. C., 465, 35 S. E., 815.\nUpon the record, the prisoner is entitled to a new trial. It is so ordered.\nNew trial.", "type": "majority", "author": "Stacy, C. J." } ], "attorneys": [ "Attorney-General Brummitt and Assistant Attorneys-General Sea-well and Bruton for the State.", "William Graves and Manly, Sendren & Womble for defendant." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "STATE v. GEORGE KEATON.\n(Filed 10 January, 1934.)\nCriminal law G i \u2014 Nonexpert witness may testify from observation as to sanity of defendant.\nWhere in a criminal prosecution the defendant sets' up the defense of insanity, the exclusion of testimony of a nonexpert witness, based upon observation of defendant, that defendant was insane at the time of the commission of the crime, is reversible error.\nAppeal by prisoner from Sink, J., at February Term, 1933, of Foesytii.\nCriminal prosecution tried upon indictment charging the prisoner with the murder of one Annie Thigpen.\nVerdict: Guilty of murder in the first degree.\nJudgment: Death by electrocution.\nThe prisoner appeals, assigning errors.\nAttorney-General Brummitt and Assistant Attorneys-General Sea-well and Bruton for the State.\nWilliam Graves and Manly, Sendren & Womble for defendant." }, "file_name": "0607-01", "first_page_order": 671, "last_page_order": 672 }