{
  "id": 8624531,
  "name": "STATE v. WILLIAM H. BRYANT",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Bryant",
  "decision_date": "1959-11-11",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "217",
  "last_page": "217",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "251 N.C. 217"
    }
  ],
  "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": 144,
    "char_count": 1487,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.458,
    "sha256": "a67f345723fc4caeaedf1c096f732951bb9bb6eb3b08dd314f32d8defbf52257",
    "simhash": "1:baf79661ddbe07c7",
    "word_count": 239
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:26:21.126874+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. WILLIAM H. BRYANT."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PeR CuRiam.\nThe evidence before the jury was ample to establish all essential elements of the offense charged and to support the judgment imposed. The .assignments of error with respect to the admissibility of evidence are without merit. The defense of entrapment interposed by the defendant is not supported by the evidence. The record discloses\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PeR CuRiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Malcolm B. Seawell, Attorney General, Harry W. McGalliard, Assistant Attorney General for the State.",
      "Thomas W. Ruffin, Robert L. McMillan, Jr. for defendant, appellant"
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. WILLIAM H. BRYANT.\n(Filed 11 November, 1959.)\nAppeal by defendant from Williams, J., June, 1959 Regular Criminal Term, Ware Superior Court.\nCriminal prosecution upon a bill of indictment which charged the defendant with the crime of bribery.\nThe evidence before .the jury disclosed the defendant paid two Raleigh police officers money for the purpose of having them \u201clay off his numbers business.\u201d The officers reported the defendant\u2019s proposition to their superior officer. They later met the defendant at his request outside the city at night .and accepted a fifty dollar bill, at which time the defendant said he would meet them again \u201cin two weeks \u2014 at the same time and place for another pay-off.\u201d The officers received the money but promised nothing. At the trial the defendant did not offer testimony. He excepted to the refusal of the court to allow his motions to dismiss.\nFrom a verdict of guilty and judgment thereon, the defendant appealed.\nMalcolm B. Seawell, Attorney General, Harry W. McGalliard, Assistant Attorney General for the State.\nThomas W. Ruffin, Robert L. McMillan, Jr. for defendant, appellant"
  },
  "file_name": "0217-01",
  "first_page_order": 261,
  "last_page_order": 261
}