Case Title: State v. Jent

Citation: 155 S.E.2d 171, 270 N.C. 652

Docket Number: 

State: north-carolina

Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

Date: 1967-06-20T00:00:00Z

Document:
155 S.E.2d 171 (1967) 270 N.C. 652 STATE of North Carolina v. William P. JENT, Jr. No. 414. Supreme Court of North Carolina. June 20, 1967. *172 T. W. Bruton, Atty. Gen., and Bernard A. Harrell, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State. Yeager, Matthews & Clayton, Winston-Salem, for defendant. SHARP, Justice. Defendant's assignments of error which comply with the rules of this Court raise only the question of nonsuit and the correctness of certain portions of the judge's charge. In re Will of Adams, 268 N.C. 565, 151 S.E.2d 59. The State's evidencewith and without the result of the Breathalyzer test was more than sufficient to take to the jury the issue of defendant's guilt of the crime charged. The motions for nonsuit were properly overruled. Defendant assigns as error the following portion of His Honor's charge: The foregoing constitutes the court's entire explanation of the application of G.S. § 20-139.1 to the evidence. It fails to meet the requirements of G.S. § 1-180 and, in effect, places the burden upon defendant to *173 rebut the statutory presumption arising from the results of his Breathalyzer test. This was error. In State v. Cooke, N.C., 155 S.E.2d 165, decided simultaneously with this case, we have held that in G.S. § 20-139.1, the General Assembly used the word presumption in the sense of a permissive inference or prima facie evidence, and that the trial judge should so instruct the jury. This appeal is controlled by State v. Cooke, supra. For the error in the charge there must be a New trial.