{
  "id": 8624959,
  "name": "STATE v. ROOSEVELT BARTON",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Barton",
  "decision_date": "1958-06-04",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "559",
  "last_page": "559",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "248 N.C. 559"
    }
  ],
  "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": "96 S.E. 2d 39",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "245 N.C. 323",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8610604
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/245/0323-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 134,
    "char_count": 1679,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.59,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.207240653798735
    },
    "sha256": "395658cd3651bd9778c7b464787fff8b04c818540dea580214069760c92bc051",
    "simhash": "1:f9974f7c278e783f",
    "word_count": 272
  },
  "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. ROOSEVELT BARTON."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nDefendant\u2019s only assignment of error is that the court erred in overruling his motion for judgment of nonsuit.\nThe only evidence was that offered by the State, which included plenary evidence that defendant intentionally shot the deceased with a deadly weapon, to wit, a 32 pistol, and' thereby proxkmately caused his death; and, if the jury found the facts to be as this evidence tended to show, presumptions that the killing (1) was unlawful, and (2) was with malice, arose. S. v. Mangum, 245 N.C. 323, 96 S.E. 2d 39, and cases cited. Since this evidence was sufficient to warrant and support a verdict of guilty of murder in the second degree, defendant\u2019s motion for judgment of nonsuit was properly overruled.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney-General Seavjell and Assistant Attorney-General Bruton for the State.",
      "Hackett & Weinstein for defendant, appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. ROOSEVELT BARTON.\n(Filed 4 June, 1958.)\nHomicide \u00a7 25\u2014\nEvidence that defendant intentionally shot the deceased with a deadly weapon, thereby proximately causing his death, raises the presumption that the killing was unlawful and was with malice, and is sufficient to warrant and support a verdict of guilty of murder in the second degree.\nAppeal by defendant from Nimocks, J., October Criminal Term, 1957, of RobesoN.\nCriminal prosecution for the murder of John H. Blanks, also known as Jackie Lowry.\nThe solicitor announced that the State would not ask for a verdict of guilty of murder in the first degree, but would ask for a verdict of guilty of second degree murder.\nUpon the verdict, \u201cGuilty of Second Degree Murder,\u201d judgment, imposing a prison sentence, was pronounced, from which defendant appealed.\nAttorney-General Seavjell and Assistant Attorney-General Bruton for the State.\nHackett & Weinstein for defendant, appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0559-01",
  "first_page_order": 601,
  "last_page_order": 601
}