{
  "id": 8650747,
  "name": "STATE v. JAMES H. MILLER",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Miller",
  "decision_date": "1887-02",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "450",
  "last_page": "451",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "97 N.C. 450"
    }
  ],
  "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": "95 N. C., 689",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11275593
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/95/0689-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "95 N. C., 689",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11275593
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/95/0689-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 121,
    "char_count": 1385,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.46,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20759009502098386
    },
    "sha256": "d43ec174380be260f4794851ab25116856f16e09f1d737acf059012eff457a81",
    "simhash": "1:011f50c20753171c",
    "word_count": 232
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:54:12.215141+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE v. JAMES H. MILLER."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Smith, C. J.\nUpon the hearing of the appeal from the judgment rendered against the defendant, at February Term, 1886, it was declared there was no error. Upon receiving the certificate of the decision in this Court, the presiding Judge of the Superior Court pronounced the same sentence, and the defendant again undertook to appeal, and the transcript of the record sent up contains no assignment of error, but certain testimony is transmitted, upon\u2019which no action was had, other than the rendition of judgment. The case is not distinguished from that of State v. Speaks, 95 N. C., 689, and the same disposition must be made of the appeal by dismissing it. So ordered.\nDismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Smith, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "The Attorney- General, for the State.",
      "Messrs. John Gatling, E. G. Smith, T. C. Fuller and George H. Snow, for the defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE v. JAMES H. MILLER.\nAppeal.\nWhere in. a criminal proceeding, the prisoner appealed from the judgment, which was affirmed by the Supreme Court, and upon receiving the certificate the Judge of the Superior Court passed the same sentence which had before been imposed, from which the defendant again appealed, but without assigning any error or showing any new facts, the appeal will be dismissed.\n{State v. Speafts, 95 N. C., 689; cited and approved).\nIndictment, heard by Philips, Judge, at July Criminal Term, 1886, of Wake Superior Court.\nThe facts appear in the opinion.\nThe Attorney- General, for the State.\nMessrs. John Gatling, E. G. Smith, T. C. Fuller and George H. Snow, for the defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0450-01",
  "first_page_order": 474,
  "last_page_order": 475
}