{
  "id": 8632261,
  "name": "STATE v. LOGAN POWELL",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Powell",
  "decision_date": "1939-04-12",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "792",
  "last_page": "793",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "215 N.C. 792"
    }
  ],
  "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": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 100,
    "char_count": 966,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.489,
    "sha256": "f403f45b6ad7e3974a27accbcab5f2e0b6568d7f2e55276ba036f7f5aa423a9d",
    "simhash": "1:1f5ec0bc2726f049",
    "word_count": 158
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:25:15.554902+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. LOGAN POWELL."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe evidence offered by the State was sufficient to carry the case to the jury. The only exception noted at the trial was to the ruling of the court in permitting a State\u2019s witness, a police officer, to say, in describing his visit to defendant\u2019s premises, where a quantity of whiskey was found, \u201cWe took a search warrant,\u201d without producing tbe warrant. There was no motion or request for the production of the warrant, and the objection seems to have been made after the evidence was in.\nThe exception is without merit.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attorneys-General Bruton and Wettach for the State.",
      "R. R. Ilawfield for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. LOGAN POWELL.\n(Filed 12 April, 1939.)\nAppeal by defendant from Armstrong, J., at October Term, 1938, of Cabarrus. No error.\nThe defendant was charged with possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale. From judgment imposing sentence upon verdict of guilty, defendant appealed.\nAttorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attorneys-General Bruton and Wettach for the State.\nR. R. Ilawfield for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0792-01",
  "first_page_order": 858,
  "last_page_order": 859
}