{
  "id": 8688707,
  "name": "The State v. John Brown",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Brown",
  "decision_date": "1819-05",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "224",
  "last_page": "226",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "3 Mur. 224"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "7 N.C. 224"
    }
  ],
  "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": 213,
    "char_count": 3866,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.392,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.282107904951295e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6178209617626356
    },
    "sha256": "b4dfedb89337348519c81b6159834f15264f43c607c59e60abc6fc3e17c7056e",
    "simhash": "1:6580d35b216826eb",
    "word_count": 682
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:45:47.457789+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "The State v. John Brown."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "IIeNBErsoN, Judge,\ndelivered the opinion of the Court:\nThe indictment charges that the Defendant is a common Sabbath-breaker and prophaner of the Lord\u2019s day. If it had stopped here, it would certainly have been insufficient, as it would not shew how or in what manner he was a common Sabbath-breaker and prophaner of the Lord\u2019s day. The Court upon an inspection of the record, must he able to perceive the alleged criminal act: for an indictment, as was once well observed from this bench by Judge Lowric, is a compound of law and fact \u2014 the latter part of the indictment charges that the Defendant kept an open shop and sold divers goods, wares and spirituous liquors to negroes and others on the Sabbath. This offence, as charged, is not punishable by indictment for if the act can be intended to be lawful, it shall be so presumed, unless it be charged to be done under circumstances which render it criminal, and be so found by a Jury. For ought that appears to the contrary, this sale might have been to the lame or weary traveller, or to others to whom it was a merit to sell instead of a crime ; and nothing shall be intended against a Defendant. And if this were the Sabbath-breaking spoken of in the foregoing part of the indictment, taking the whole together, the Defendant well might have done all charged against him, and yet have committed do crime ; and as tins may have been the case, wo are bound to presume it ; at least, not to presume to the contrary. \u2014 The judgment must be arrested. -",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "IIeNBErsoN, Judge,"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The State v. John Brown.\n1 > From Camden. J\nIndictment charged that the Defendant was a common Sabbath-brealcer and prophaner of the Lord\u2019s day, commonly called Sunday ; and that he on divers days, neing Lord\u2019s days, did keep a certain open shop, and then and there sold and exposed to sale divers goods, wares and spirituous liquors, to negroes and others, to the great damage of the good citizens of the state, &c. \u2014 Judgment arrested, for\nCharging a man with being a common Sabbath-breaker and prophaner of the Lord\u2019s day is insufficient, as it does not shew how or in -what manner he was a common Sabbath-breaker, See. An indictment is a compound of law and fact, and the Court upon an inspection of the indictment, must be able to perceive the alleged crime.\nCharging the Defendant with keeping an open shop and selling goods and spirituous liquors to negroes and others on the Sabbath, is insufficient ; for if the act can be intended to be lawful it shall be so presumed ; and this presumption will continue, unless the act be charged to be done under circumstances which render it criminal, and be so found by a Jury. \u2014 In this case, the Defendant might have sold to persons to whom it was a merit rather than a crime to sell; and nothing shall be intended against him.\nThe indictment against the Defendant was in the following words, to wit,\n\u201c The Jurors for the state, upon their oaths present, that John Brown, \u201c late of the County of Camden, shop-keeper, on the first day of February, li 1817, and continually thereafter up to the time of taking this inquisi-ci tion at Camden aforesaid, was, and yet is, a common Sabbath-breaker \u201c and prophaner of the Lord\u2019s day, commonly called Sunday ; and that \u201c the said John Brown, on the day aforesaid, being Lord\u2019s day, and on \u201c divers other days and times, as well before as since, being Lord\u2019s day, \u201c did then and there keep and maintain a certain open shop, and on the ** days and times aforesaid, there sold and exposed to sale divers goods, \u201c wares and spirituous liquors, to negroes and others, to the great damage of the good citizens of this state, and against the peace and dig- \u201c nity of the state.\u201d\nThe Defendant submitted ; but the Court entertaining a doubt whether the facts set forth in the indictment constituted an indictable offence as therein set forth, sent the case to this Court; and"
  },
  "file_name": "0224-01",
  "first_page_order": 228,
  "last_page_order": 230
}