{
  "id": 8622195,
  "name": "STATE v. L. A. MUSE",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Muse",
  "decision_date": "1941-02-26",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "226",
  "last_page": "227",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "219 N.C. 226"
    }
  ],
  "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": "200 S. E., 22",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "214 N. C., 558",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8631928
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/214/0558-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "80 S. E., 1075",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "166 N. C., 265",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11269400
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/166/0265-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "182 S. E., 716",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "209 N. C., 53",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        2221515
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/209/0053-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 186,
    "char_count": 2533,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.482,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.5567081956875517e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8149444234007466
    },
    "sha256": "5d283da81f7c88410f58c0e87123c4a573315938db9a85febd4c03bd12d6de80",
    "simhash": "1:1db4cbdb265aeeb7",
    "word_count": 438
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:38:18.105136+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. L. A. MUSE."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Pee Cueiam.\nThe Attorney-General confesses error.\nWhen a defendant in a criminal prosecution in the Superior Court enters a plea of not guilty he may not, without changing his plea, waive his constitutional right of trial by jury, S. v. Hill, 209 N. C., 53, 182 S. E., 716, the determinative facts cannot be referred to the decision of the court even by consent \u2014 they must be found by the jury. S. v. Allen, 166 N. C., 265, 80 S. E., 1075.\nThe Supreme Court will not venture an advisory opinion on a constitutional question unless it is properly presented, and will not decide such a question even then when the appeal may be properly determined on a question of less moment. S. v. Lueders, 214 N. C., 558, 200 S. E., 22.\nSince it appears that there is no verdict upon which a valid judgment could be based, the case must be remanded to the Superior Court for trial according to the usual course and practice. S. v. Lueders, supra.\nError and remanded.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Pee Cueiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attorneys-General Bruton and Patton for the State.",
      "Cecil C. Jackson for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. L. A. MUSE.\n(Filed 26 February, 1941.)\n1. Constitutional Law \u00a7 27\u2014\nWhen a defendant in a criminal prosecution in the Superior Court enters a plea of not guilty he may not, without changing his plea, waive his constitutional right of trial by jury, and the determinative facts cannot be referred to the decision of the court even by consent, but must be found by the jury.\n2. Appeal and Error \u00a7 40g\u2014\nThe Supreme Court will not venture an advisory opinion on a constitutional question unless it is properly presented, and will not decide such a question even then when the appeal may be properly determined on a question of less moment.\nAppeal by defendant from Warlick, J., at November Term, 1940, of Haywood.\nDefendant was tried upon warrant charging violation of ch. 52, Public Laws 1931, as amended, in that he did engage in plumbing contracting business without first having obtained license so to do.\nThe record discloses that the defendant \u201cpleaded not guilty to the charge and moved to quash the warrant,\u201d and that \u201csaid motion was overruled,\u201d and \u201cafter hearing the evidence for the State defendant moves for directed verdict of not guilty. Motion denied. Defendant rests and renews motion. Motion denied. Court enters verdict of guilty and enters judgment thereon that defendant pay a fine of $100.00 and the costs.\u201d\nIt appears from the brief of appellant-that he seeks to test the constitutionality of the act under which he was indicted.\nAttorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attorneys-General Bruton and Patton for the State.\nCecil C. Jackson for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0226-01",
  "first_page_order": 268,
  "last_page_order": 269
}