{
  "id": 8683063,
  "name": "STATE v. WILLIAM LOCKE",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Locke",
  "decision_date": "1877-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "481",
  "last_page": "482",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "77 N.C. 481"
    }
  ],
  "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": 247,
    "char_count": 3097,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.432,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.749277409716814e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8325989275822645
    },
    "sha256": "593d68b3e87e201dedc7152c139ddbc14a8b3acaf81dba16f595bae3db451091",
    "simhash": "1:9caab1648becba46",
    "word_count": 535
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:46:21.915598+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. WILLIAM LOCKE."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "EaiRCLOTH, J.\nThe defendant was indicted for the murder of one Barringer, and was convicted. There were several witnesses examined who proved that there was a fight faking place between other parties, and the evidence was \u25a0conflicting in regard to the conduct of the deceased and the prisoner. His Honor charged the jury, that \u201c if they believed the witnesses, Plummer, Livengood and Cully, or \u2022either of them, the fact of slaying had been proved,\u201d and the prisoner excepted.\nThe witness Livengood testified as follows: \u201c Prisoner was standing near a fence whittling with his knife ; a difficulty arose between Matt. Locke and Tom Hyde; deceased passed by the witness going across the log, prisoner passed on below witness, going towards the- deceased ; in a short time he saw prisoner leaving deceased, and saw blood running from the deceased, and the prisoner trotting off for about fifty yards, and their he took off his hat and ran with great speed; the deceased had nothing to do with the fight going on ; prisoner approached deceased coolly and slowly, \u25a0*. * * did not see prisoner after he passed witness, until he saw him running off\u2019 as before stated.\u201d\nThe ease was argued before us on this exception alone,, and we sustain the exception. The homicide, of course, is a material fact to be established by proof, and it is the exclusive province of the jury to say, whether the evidence proves the fact or not. Livengood does not say that the prisoner slew the deceased, but only deposes to certain circumstances which might or might not satisfy the jury. His Honor invaded their province by charging the jury, that if they believed Livengood, the fact of slaying is proved. This was \u25a0 weighing the evidence and declaring the result as a matter of law to the jury.\n\u201c No Judge, in giving a chai\u2019ge to the petty jury, shall give an opinion whether a fact is fully or sufficiently proven, ,such matter being the true office and province of the jury, &c.\u201d Bat, Rev. \"ch. 17, \u00a7 237.\n\"W e have looked carefully through the whole of His Hon- or\u2019s charge, and find nothing to cure the error above designated.\nThere is error. Let this be certified to the Court below to the end that the case may proceed according to law.\nPer Curiam. Venire de novo.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "EaiRCLOTH, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General and Mr. J. M. McCorkle, for the State.",
      "Messrs. Shipp $ Bailey, for the defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. WILLIAM LOCKE.\nIndictment \u2014 Murder\u2014Judge\u2019s Charge.\n1. Where on the trial of an indictment for murder, the Court charged the jury \u201cthat if they believed the witnesses A, Band C, or either of them, the fact of slaying was proved Held, to be error.\n:2. It is the exclusive province of the jury to say whether the evidence proves a fact or not; Therefore, the Court cannot weigh the evidence and declare the result as a matter of law to the jury.\nINDICTMENT for Murder, removed from Rowan and tried \u00a1at Spi-ing Term, 1877, of Davidson Superior Court, before Kerr, J.\nThe facts necessary to an understanding of the point decided in this Court are sufficiently stated by Mr. Justice Fatr-oloth. Yerdict of guilty. Judgment. Appeal by defendant. \u25a0\nAttorney General and Mr. J. M. McCorkle, for the State.\nMessrs. Shipp $ Bailey, for the defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0481-01",
  "first_page_order": 495,
  "last_page_order": 496
}