From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Baker

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Feb 1, 1894
19 S.E. 145 (N.C. 1894)

Opinion

(February Term, 1894.)

Prosecution of Criminal Action — Public Interest — Costs of Prosecution of Criminal Action, When Prosecutor Taxed With.

1. A finding by the trial judge that a prosecution of a criminal action "was not for the public interest" is equivalent to a finding that it "was not required by the public interest."

2. In such case the person marked as prosecutor on a bill before it was acted on by the grand jury was properly adjudged liable for the costs.

THE defendant was indicted for disposing of mortgaged property, and, upon his trial, before Hoke, J., and a jury, at Fall Term, 1893, of WILSON, was acquitted.

The court found that the prosecution was not for the public interest, and adjudged that the prosecutor, C. A. Young, of the firm of C. A. Young Bro., who was marked on the bill as prosecutor, should pay the costs, whereupon he appealed.

Attorney-General for the State.

No counsel contra.


(APPEAL BY PROSECUTOR YOUNG.)


It was found by his Honor that the prosecution in this action "was not for the public interest," which was equivalent to a finding that it " was not required by the public interest." That is conclusive. S. v. Roberts, 106 N.C. 662. The appellant, C. A. Young, was marked as prosecuter on the bill before it was acted on by the grand jury, and it was proper, under those circumstances, that (813) he should be adjudged to ge [be] liable for costs, to the exoneration of the county. The Code, sec. 737; S. v. Hamilton, 106 N.C. 660.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Baker

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Feb 1, 1894
19 S.E. 145 (N.C. 1894)
Case details for

State v. Baker

Case Details

Full title:STATE v. A. J. BAKER

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Feb 1, 1894

Citations

19 S.E. 145 (N.C. 1894)
114 N.C. 812

Citing Cases

Byrd v. Israel

Bednarski, like Bagnall, refutes Byrd's contention that the variance in "ownership" or "possession" was…

State v. Roberts

Error. Cited: S. v. Carlton, 107 N.C. 957; Smith v. Smith, 108 N.C. 369; S. v. Sanders, 111 N.C. 701, 702,…