State v. Bunting, 118 N.C. 1200 (1896)

Feb. 1896 · Supreme Court of North Carolina

118 N.C. 1200

STATE v. NATHANIEL BUNTING.

Form of Indictment for Perjury.

An indictment for perjury must charge that it was done feloni-ously.

INDICTMENT for perjury, tried before Graham, J., at October Term, 1895, of Sampson Superior Court.

The Attorney General and Messrs. Shepherd & Busbee, for the State.

Messrs. F. B. Cooper and John D. Kerr, for the defendant (appellant).

Faircloth, C. J.:

The defendant was indicted and convicted of the crime of perjury. A motion in arrest of judgment, because the indictment failed to charge that it was committed “feloniously,” was overruled and the defendant appealed. This question has been so often decided that it requires no further discussion. State v. Purdie, 67 N. C., 25; State v. Skidmore, 109 N. C., 795; State v. Bryan, 112 N. C., 848; State v. Caldwell, Ibid., 854; State v. Wilson, 116 N. C., 979; State v. Snow, 117 N. C., 774.

Reversed.