{
  "id": 8626387,
  "name": "STATE v. JADDIE (JERRY) DALLAS",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Dallas",
  "decision_date": "1960-12-14",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "568",
  "last_page": "569",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "253 N.C. 568"
    }
  ],
  "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": "10 S.E. 2d 815",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "218 N.C. 280",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8617126
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/218/0280-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "28 S.E. 2d 340",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "222 N.C. 428",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8630766
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/222/0428-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 204,
    "char_count": 2692,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.552,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.9716397958907624e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7393766972514614
    },
    "sha256": "6c0437ec47882beaaab3b32b18c9cbf06dc39400cafec906f81596ba67c74cec",
    "simhash": "1:b137045f26e89443",
    "word_count": 460
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:02:38.064481+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. JADDIE (JERRY) DALLAS."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per CuRiam.\nDefendant denied that he intentionally shot deceased. The court charged the jury: \u201c. . . (Y)ou may return one of three verdicts: a verdict of guilty of murder in the second degree, a verdict \u25a0of guilty of manslaughter, or a verdict of not guilty on the grounds >of self-defense.\u201d The charge as a whole limits the authority of the jury to return a verdict of not guilty to a finding of \u201cnot guilty by reason of self-defense.\u201d At no time was the jury instructed that, if upon a fair and impartial consideration of the evidence they had a reasonable doubt of defendant\u2019s guilt, it would be their duty to acquit him. In effect the court instructed the jury that defendant was not entitled to an acquittal unless he satisfied the jury that he had acted in self-defense. Defendant\u2019s plea of not guilty cast upon the State the burden of satisfying the jury from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt of each and every essential element of the offense. In limiting the possibility of acquittal to a showing of self-defense the court erred. State v. Baker, 222 N.C. 428, 28 S.E. 2d 340; State v. Howell, 218 N.C. 280, 10 S.E. 2d 815.\nNew trial.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per CuRiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Bruton and Assistant Attorney General McGal-\u25a0liard for the State.",
      "Nance, Barrington & Collier and Rudolph G. Singleton, Jr., for \u25a0defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. JADDIE (JERRY) DALLAS.\n(Filed 14 December, 1960.)\nHomicide \u00a7 38\u2014\nAn instruction which, in effect, limits a verdict of not guilty to a finding by the jury that defendant killed deceased in self-defense must be held for prejudicial error, since defendant\u2019s plea of not guilty places the burden upon the State of satisfying the jury beyond a reasonable doubt of each and every essential element of the offense.\nAppeal by defendant from Williams, J., March 1960 Criminal Term, of CUMBERLAND.\nThis is a criminal action. Defendant is charged in the bill of indictment with the murder of one Bobby Pate. The State elected not to prosecute defendant for the capital offense of murder in the first degree.\nThe evidence tends to show: Defendant was working at a drive-in cafe. Pate and companions entered the cafe and became boisterous and offensive. Defendant asked them to leave. They were armed with knives and advanced toward defendant. Defendant got a pistol and fired twice \u201cover their heads.\u201d He fired additional shots. Pate was struck by a bullet. He was carried to a hospital and died as a result of the bullet wound. The evidence was conflicting as to whether Pate was facing defendant at the time he was shot or was in the act of leaving.\nPlea: not guilty. Verdict: guilty of manslaughter. Judgment: prison \u25a0sentence of 7 to 10 years.\nDefendant appealed and assigned errors.\nAttorney General Bruton and Assistant Attorney General McGal-\u25a0liard for the State.\nNance, Barrington & Collier and Rudolph G. Singleton, Jr., for \u25a0defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0568-01",
  "first_page_order": 608,
  "last_page_order": 609
}