{
  "id": 8616742,
  "name": "STATE v. CARLEE MORGAN",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Morgan",
  "decision_date": "1959-01-14",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "421",
  "last_page": "421",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "249 N.C. 421"
    }
  ],
  "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": 157,
    "char_count": 1744,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.577,
    "sha256": "858570da77ea18d5bc2dc1b392693f771c0035449012db5eae2b0c7cce78940e",
    "simhash": "1:07bf443d465249fa",
    "word_count": 268
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:25:15.863799+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. CARLEE MORGAN."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Pee Cueiam.\nDecision here is determined upon whether the alleged confession of defendant was voluntary.\nThe ruling of the court is accordant with well established principles of law. And the evidence is abundantly sufficient to take the case to the jury and to support the verdict rendered. Hence in the judgment below there is\nNo Error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Pee Cueiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Seawell, Assistant Attorney General T. W. Bru-ton, for the State.",
      "Britt, Campbell & Britt for defendant, appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. CARLEE MORGAN.\n(Filed 14 January, 1959.)\nAppeal by defendant from Preyer, J., at Regular April 1958 Term, of Robeson.\nCriminal prosecution upon a bill of indictment charging that defendant did unlawfully and willfully, maliciously, and feloniously burn certain automobile, property of Bossie Henderson, with the intent to injure and prejudice the insurer Southeastern Fire Insurance Company thereon under certain policy in violation of G.S. 14-66.\nUpon trial in Superior Court the State offered in evidence a statement purportedly signed by defendant confessing the burning of the automobile in question. The trial judge ruled that the confession was voluntary, and overruled defendant\u2019s objection thereto. The State offered also other evidence tending to show other incriminating statements.\nThe defendant testifying in his own behalf denied the commission of the offense charged.\nThe case was submitted to the jury upon the evidence offered under a charge apparently free from error,\u2014 since none is pointed out.\n\"Verdict: Guilty as charged in the bill of indictment.\nJudgment: Confinement in common jail of Robeson County to be assigned to the State Prison Department for a period of twelve months.\nDefendant appeals therefrom to Supreme Court and assigns error.\nAttorney General Seawell, Assistant Attorney General T. W. Bru-ton, for the State.\nBritt, Campbell & Britt for defendant, appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0421-01",
  "first_page_order": 463,
  "last_page_order": 463
}