{
  "id": 8610351,
  "name": "STATE v. CLYDE YORK",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. York",
  "decision_date": "1958-10-29",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "132",
  "last_page": "133",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "249 N.C. 132"
    }
  ],
  "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": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 176,
    "char_count": 1888,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.606,
    "sha256": "f490995b5e17d1183aa55e320f2f7898ece7ebcd52b44a14e078411cb363845f",
    "simhash": "1:96ad562ede2803fb",
    "word_count": 324
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:25:15.863799+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "PARKER, J., not sitting."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. CLYDE YORK."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nDefendant, as appellant, presents for consideration on this appeal nineteen assignments of error based upon like number of exceptions taken during the course of the trial, and to matters occurring in Superior Court. It is noted, however, that in nine cases the exception is to the action of the court in sustaining objections to questions asked in behalf of defendant. In each of these instances the record fails to show what the answer of the witness would have been, so as to indicate its materiality.\nAfter careful consideration the exceptions (1) to denial of motions for judgment as of nonsuit, aptly made, (2) to portions of the charge, (3) to remarks of the judge, (4) to the failure of the trial judge to charge the law in various aspects, and (5) to all others, error for which \u00abthe verdict and judgment below should be set aside is not made to appear.\nHence in the trial below there is\nNo Error.\nPARKER, J., not sitting.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Seawell, Assistant Attorney General Harry W. McGalliard, for the State.",
      "Spry, White & Hamrick for defendant, appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. CLYDE YORK.\n(Filed 29 October, 1958.)\nAppeal by defendant from Armstrong, J., at July 21, 1958 Term of Forsyth.\nCriminal prosecution upon a bill of indictment charging defendant with the crime of subornation of perjury, G.S. 14-210, in the way and manner specified.\nDefendant, in open court, pleaded not guilty.\nThe case was submitted to the jury upon evidence offered by the State, and by the defendant, under the charge of the court.\nVerdict: Guilty of subornation of perjury as charged in the bill of indictment in this case.\nJudgment: That the defendant be confined in the State\u2019s prison at Raleigh for a period of not less than seven nor more than ten years, to be assigned to do labor as provided by law.\nDefendant, through his counsel, excepts and appeals to Supreme Court and assigns error.\nAttorney General Seawell, Assistant Attorney General Harry W. McGalliard, for the State.\nSpry, White & Hamrick for defendant, appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0132-01",
  "first_page_order": 174,
  "last_page_order": 175
}