{
  "id": 8574676,
  "name": "STATE v. THURMAN BROWER",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Brower",
  "decision_date": "1968-02-02",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "740",
  "last_page": "741",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "272 N.C. 740"
    }
  ],
  "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": "92 S.E. 2d 401",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "244 N.C. 53",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        2219541
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/244/0053-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "73 S.E. 2d 283",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "236 N.C. 454",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8626302
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/236/0454-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 166,
    "char_count": 2596,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.565,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.292217809909693e-08,
      "percentile": 0.2706995658820263
    },
    "sha256": "b3d856484d63b31de36574ed6d22b47b3aa30318fd2899dd3f0adf9660e2bd78",
    "simhash": "1:ea13b09f12d20faa",
    "word_count": 439
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:31:35.058336+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. THURMAN BROWER."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe Recorder's Court of Randolph County had final jurisdiction of the offense charged, subject to defendant\u2019s right of appeal, and no local act authorized transfer from Recorder\u2019s Court to Superior Court.\nWhen there has been no trial in the court below of an offense of which it has final jurisdiction (subject to right of appeal to Superior Court), and the cause is transferred to the Superior Court upon waiver of trial and motion for transfer to Superior Court by defendant, trial in Superior Court upon the original warrant is a nullity. State v. Thomas, 236 N.C. 454, 73 S.E. 2d 283.\nAlthough defendant did not. file a brief with this Court, it appears from the face of the record proper that the conviction and sentence are void, and in such case this Court will, of its own motion, arrest judgment. State v. Lucas, 244 N.C. 53, 92 S.E. 2d 401. However, the State may proceed to try defendant for the offense in the proper court.\nJudgment arrested.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Bruton, Assistant Attorney General Melvin, and Staff Attorney Costen for the State.",
      "No counsel contra."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. THURMAN BROWER.\n(Filed 2 February, 1968.)\n1. Constitutional law \u00a7 28\u2014\nWhere there has been no trial in the inferior court haying jurisdiction of the offense charged in the warrant and the cause is transferred to the Superior Court upon defendant\u2019s demand for jury trial, trial in the Superior Court upon the original warrant is a nullity.\n2. Criminal law \u00a7 127';\u2014\nWhere a fatal defect appears on the face of the record, the Supreme Court will, ew mero motu, arrest judgment.\nAppeal by defendant from Armstrong, J., September 1967 Criminal Session of RaNdolph.\nDefendant was charged in a warrant with operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. The warrant was returnable to the Recorder\u2019s Court of Randolph County. When the case was called for trial, defendant waived trial and moved that-the case be transferred to the Superior Court of Randolph County. The motion was allowed. Defendant was tried upon the original warrant in Randolph Superior Court at the September 1967 Session, and the jury returned a verdict of guilty as charged. Upon imposition of sentence, defendant moved in arrest of judgment. This motion was denied, and defendant appealed.\nDefendant filed no brief in this Court but filed a motion in arrest of judgment because of defect in the warrant. On 17 October 1967 the Court in Conference denied this motion. The disposition of the case in Recorder\u2019s Court was not shown in the record until an addendum to the record was filed on 19 October 1967.\nAttorney General Bruton, Assistant Attorney General Melvin, and Staff Attorney Costen for the State.\nNo counsel contra."
  },
  "file_name": "0740-01",
  "first_page_order": 776,
  "last_page_order": 777
}