{
  "id": 1955350,
  "name": "THE STATE v. SETH GASKINS",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Gaskins",
  "decision_date": "1871-01",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "320",
  "last_page": "320",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "65 N.C. 320"
    }
  ],
  "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": 122,
    "char_count": 1784,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.402,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.527646540942415e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3484494655866037
    },
    "sha256": "7e5211a2119aca851a9d68b74a781002ed83bd595fa7547d5e5301aeb98f87a8",
    "simhash": "1:932a7645564312dd",
    "word_count": 316
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:41:56.423501+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "THE STATE v. SETH GASKINS."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Dick, J.\nThe judgment of the law, as pronounced by his Honor, was, u that the defendant, Seth Gaskins, be imprisoned in the State\u2019s prison for one year, and in the mean time until he is carried there, that he be imprisoned in the County jail.\u201d\nThe defendant insists that this judgment is defective and ought not to be executed, as it does not specify with sufficient certainty the term of imprisonment in the State\u2019s prison.\nThe term of imprisonment must be fixed by the Judge within certain limits; the law declares that the term u shall begin to run upon and shall include the day^of conviction.\u201d Acts 1868-\u201969, ch. 167, sec. 9 and 10. The judgment in this case conforms to the statute. There is no error.\nLet this be certified.\nPer Curiam. Judgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Dick, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Warren & Carter and Bailey, for the defendant.",
      "Attorney General, for the State."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "THE STATE v. SETH GASKINS.\nUpon a conviction for larceny, a sentence \u201cthat tie defendant be imprisoned. in tie State prison for one year, and in the meantime and until he is carried there, that he be imprisoned in the County jail,\u201d is sufficiently definite as to the term of imprisonment in the State prison to be valid under the Act of 1868-\u20199, ch. 167, secs. 9 and 10, which declares that the term \u201c shall begin to run upon and include the day of conviction.\u201d\nThe defendant, Seth Gaskins, was tried and convicted at the last Term of the Superior Courtfor the County of Hyde, before his Honor, Jones, J-., upon an indictment for larceny, where the following sentence was pronounced upon him, \u201c that the defendant, Seth Gaskins, be imprisoned in the State\u2019s prison for one year, and in the mean time until he is carried there, that he be imprisoned in the County jail.\u201d From this judgment the defendant prayed an appeal to the Supreme Court.\nWarren & Carter and Bailey, for the defendant.\nAttorney General, for the State."
  },
  "file_name": "0320-01",
  "first_page_order": 330,
  "last_page_order": 330
}