{
  "id": 8622843,
  "name": "STATE v. ERNEST ROOSEVELT ST. CLAIR",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. St. Clair",
  "decision_date": "1958-04-30",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "333",
  "last_page": "334",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "248 N.C. 333"
    }
  ],
  "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": "100 S.E. 2d 493",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "247 N.C. 228",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8626254
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/247/0228-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "97 S.E. 2d 840",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "246 N.C. 183",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8625313
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/246/0183-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 121,
    "char_count": 1327,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.588,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20722482275993698
    },
    "sha256": "ca734dfb33c7fa45d83c30a0d449b8ace64a9d18b7521cc445a9a696750df71d",
    "simhash": "1:ab296d68b45e2cca",
    "word_count": 217
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:38:24.992419+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. ERNEST ROOSEVELT ST. CLAIR"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nAppellant, charged with the operation of a motor vehicle upon a public highway while under the influence of intoxicants in violation of G.S. 20-138, was tried and found guilty at August Term, 1956; and the prayer for judgment was continued until October Term, 1956.\nIn S. v. St. Clair, 246 N.C. 183, 97 S.E. 2d 840, no error was found in defendant\u2019s trial and conviction at August Term, 1956. In S. v. St. Clair, 247 N.C. 228, 100 S.E. 2d 493, an error in the prior opinion, relating solely to the judgment, was corrected; and the judgment pronounced in superior court at October Term, 1956, to wit, that the defendant pay a fine of $100.00 and costs, was upheld as the final judgment in the cause.\nThe present purported appeal is based solely on defendant\u2019s exception to Judge Olive\u2019s order that the judgment pronounced at October Term, 1956, be \u201cdocketed against the defendant Ernest Roosevelt St. Clair.\u201d Obviously, no appeal lies from an order which merely recognizes and orders docketed a judgment theretofore declared final by this Court.\nAppeal dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney-General Patton and Assistant Attorney-General Love for the State.",
      "Llewellyn & McKenzie for defendant, appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. ERNEST ROOSEVELT ST. CLAIR\n(Filed 30 April, 1958.)\nAppeal by defendant from Olive, J., January Term, 1958, of Cabar-rus.\nAttorney-General Patton and Assistant Attorney-General Love for the State.\nLlewellyn & McKenzie for defendant, appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0333-01",
  "first_page_order": 375,
  "last_page_order": 376
}