{ "id": 8629196, "name": "STATE v. ARTHUR DOVE", "name_abbreviation": "State v. Dove", "decision_date": "1942-10-14", "docket_number": "", "first_page": "162", "last_page": "163", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "222 N.C. 162" } ], "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": "83 S. E., 831", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "168 N. C., 165", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8658106 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/168/0165-01" ] }, { "cite": "81 S. E., 416", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "166 N. C., 349", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 11269679 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/166/0349-01" ] }, { "cite": "154 S. E., 604", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "199 N. C., 278", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8599333 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/199/0278-01" ] }, { "cite": "50 S. E., 456", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "138 N. C., 627", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 11270113 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/138/0627-01" ] }, { "cite": "183 S. E., 286", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "209 N. C., 229", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 2221349 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/209/0229-01" ] }, { "cite": "161 S. E., 533", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "201 N. C., 761", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8627927 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/201/0761-01" ] }, { "cite": "156 S. E., 157", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "200 N. C., 77", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8616081 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/200/0077-01" ] }, { "cite": "87 S. E., 328", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "170 N. C., 769", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8662803 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/170/0769-01" ] }, { "cite": "75 N. C., 123", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8686988 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/75/0123-01" ] }, { "cite": "166 S. E., 387", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "203 N. C., 528", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8614844 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/203/0528-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 183, "char_count": 2039, "ocr_confidence": 0.505, "pagerank": { "raw": 2.1695660278838437e-07, "percentile": 0.7708704252641756 }, "sha256": "4fbb984551b4ca79d020ff5f483b75e433bdf2125175517e8a71794d3bb9715b", "simhash": "1:952b4b7b13808c52", "word_count": 382 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:48:14.759571+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [], "parties": [ "STATE v. ARTHUR DOVE." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "Per Curiam.\nTbe defendant was indicted for murder. However, at tbe solicitor\u2019s election be was not put on trial for first degree murder but for murder in tbe second degree or manslaughter. This was equivalent to taking a nolle prosequi on tbe capital charge. S. v. Gregory, 203 N. C., 528, 166 S. E., 387. At tbe close of tbe State\u2019s evidence defendant\u2019s motion for judgment as of ndnsuit was denied. Tbe solicitor then moved to be permitted to offer additional testimony. This motion was allowed, and, it appearing that tbe evidence desired was not presently available, tbe court ordered a mistrial, and continued tbe case. Tbe defendant excepted to tbe ruling of tbe trial judge, and appealed to this Court.\nTbe ordering of a mistrial in a case less than capital is a matter in tbe discretion of tbe court. S. v. Johnson, 75 N. C., 123; S. v. Upton, 170 N. C., 769, 87 S. E., 328; S. v. Ellis, 200 N. C., 77, 156 S. E., 157; S. v. Guice, 201 N. C., 761, 161 S. E., 533; S. v. Watson, 209 N. C., 229, 183 S. E., 286: In capital cases only is tbe judge required to find tbe facts and place them on record so that upon a plea of former jeopardy tbe action of 'the court may be reviewed. S. v. Tyson, 138 N. C., 627, 50 S. E., 456; S. v. Beal, 199 N. C., 278 (295), 154 S. E., 604.\nIt is apparent that tbe appeal is premature and must be dismissed. S. v. Andrews, 166 N. C., 349, 81 S. E., 416; S. v. Ford, 168 N. C., 165, 83 S. E., 831.\nAppeal dismissed.", "type": "majority", "author": "Per Curiam." } ], "attorneys": [ "Attorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attorneys-General Patton and Rhodes for the State.", "Neil McX. Salmon and 0. L. Guy for defendant." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "STATE v. ARTHUR DOVE.\n(Filed 14 October, 1942.)\n1. Criminal Daw \u00a7 55\u2014\nThe ordering- of a mistrial in a case less than capital is a matter of discretion.\n2. Criminal Daw \u00a7 19\u2014\nWhere defendant indicted for murder, solicitor\u2019s election to ask for a verdict for murder in the second degree or manslaughter, is equivalent to a nolle prosequi on the capital charge.\nAppeal by defendant from Harris, J., at May Term, 1942, of IIab-Nett.\nAppeal dismissed.\nAttorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attorneys-General Patton and Rhodes for the State.\nNeil McX. Salmon and 0. L. Guy for defendant." }, "file_name": "0162-01", "first_page_order": 206, "last_page_order": 207 }