{ "id": 8624539, "name": "STATE v. ELVIE BROWN", "name_abbreviation": "State v. Brown", "decision_date": "1946-11-06", "docket_number": "", "first_page": "681", "last_page": "682", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "226 N.C. 681" } ], "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": "219 N. C., 667", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8625993 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/219/0667-01" ] }, { "cite": "108 S. E., 376", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "182 N. C., 781", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8658808 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/182/0781-01" ] }, { "cite": "216 N. C., 570", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8609820 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/216/0570-01" ] }, { "cite": "217 N. C., 111", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8599748 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/217/0111-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 263, "char_count": 3893, "ocr_confidence": 0.465, "pagerank": { "raw": 8.779250901202594e-08, "percentile": 0.4957790975458415 }, "sha256": "302ab7e9e069ab0eebdc05ba1990e16d0439ae9d0d36038d211ec45e28f356d5", "simhash": "1:4f4755bacb0f8c77", "word_count": 702 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:52:42.041183+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [], "parties": [ "STATE v. ELVIE BROWN." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "Devon, J.\nThe State\u2019s evidence disclosed that the witness Smith was struck and his hip and leg broken by a speeding automobile driven by the defendant, and that the defendant did not stop at the scene of the accident or give his name, address and license number as required by the statute, Gr. S., 20-166. The place where the accident occurred was on the highway near Liberty, North Carolina. The defendant admitted that he knew he had hit a man and did not stop or return to the scene, but did stop at a store 200 yards away and \u201cgot Mr. Moore (Murray) to take tbe injured man to Liberty.\u201d Defendant testified tbat be went borne and bid because be was scared.\nTbe defendant excepted to tbe exclusion of testimony as to bis effort to obtain assistance for tbe injured man, but tbe substance of tbis evidence seems to bave been admitted without objection. S. v. Elder, 217 N. C., 111, 6 S. E. (2d), 840. In any event we tbink tbe evidence was immaterial on tbe issue of bis guilt or innocence of tbe offense charged.\nTbe defendant also brought forward in bis appeal a single paragraph of tbe judge\u2019s charge to which be noted exception. As tbe remainder of tbe charge does not appear, it is presumed tbe court charged tbe law correctly. S. v. Hargrove, 216 N. C., 570, 5 S. E. (2d), 852; S. v. Jones, 182 N. C., 781, 108 S. E., 376. Nor do we find prejudicial error in tbe portion excepted to.\nThe defendant relies upon bis good faith after the accident in obtaining aid for the injured man, but tbis humane action cannot be held to relieve the defendant, if as a matter of fact be bad violated the statute. the statute not only required the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident to stop at the scene of the accident, but also, when the accident results in injury to any person, the driver is required to give bis name, address, operator\u2019s license and the registration number of bis vehicle, and to render reasonable assistance to the injured person. S. v. King, 219 N. C., 667, 14 S. E. (2d), 803. It is apparent tbat on bis own testimony the defendant has violated the provisions of tbis statute. G. S., 20-166 (c).\nTbe subsequent action of the defendant was a matter for the consideration of tbe court in entering judgment.\nIn the trial we find\nNo error.", "type": "majority", "author": "Devon, J." } ], "attorneys": [ "Attorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attorneys-General Bruton, Rhodes, and Moody for the State.", "J. Lee Moody and Walter D. Siler for defendant." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "STATE v. ELVIE BROWN.\n(Filed 6 November, 1946.)\n1. Criminal Law \u00a7 81c (3) \u2014\nThe exclusion of testimony cannot be held prejudicial when testimony of the same import is admitted without objection.\n2. Criminal Law \u00a7 77c\u2014\nWhere only a portion of the charge is brought forward in the record, all other portions of the charge not brought forward will be deemed without error.\n3. Automobiles \u00a7 31a\u2014\nWhere the driver of a car admits that he knew he had hit a man and did not stop or return to the scene, his own testimony discloses a violation of G. S., 20-166 (c), and his good faith in stopping 200 yards away from the accident and obtaining aid for the injured man before proceeding on his way to his home is/ immaterial on the issue of guilt or innocence and the exclusion of testimony to this effect is without error.\n4. Same\u2014\nG. S., 20-166 (c), requires the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident to stop at the scene, and in the event the accident involves the injury of any person, it requires him to give his name, address, operator\u2019s license and the registration number of his vehicle, and to render reasonable assistance to the injured person.\nAppeal by defendant from Sink, J., at June Term, 1946, of Eah-dolph. No error.\nThe defendant was charged with failing to stop at the scene of an accident in which the automobile he was driving was involved, in violation of G-. S., 20-166.\nThe jury returned verdict of guilty, and from judgment imposing sentence defendant appealed.\nAttorney-General McMullan and Assistant Attorneys-General Bruton, Rhodes, and Moody for the State.\nJ. Lee Moody and Walter D. Siler for defendant." }, "file_name": "0681-01", "first_page_order": 729, "last_page_order": 730 }