Case Name: In re Petition of JESSE T. JONES for Restoration to Citizenship
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1912-10-09
Citations: 160 N.C. 15
Docket Number: 
Parties: In re Petition of JESSE T. JONES for Restoration to Citizenship.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 160
Pages: 15–17

Head Matter:
In re Petition of JESSE T. JONES for Restoration to Citizenship.
(Filed 9 October, 1912.)
1. Executive Pardon — Imprisonment—Restoration of Citizenship— Interpretation of Statutes.
One who has been convicted of murder in the second degree and has been pardoned by the Governor, and released from imprisonment, may not have his citizenship restored under the provisions of Revisal, see. 2680, by petition to the judge presiding at any term of the Superior Court held for the county in which the conviction was had, when filed after the expiration of one year after such conviction, for in such instances Revisal, secs. 2675 and 2676 apply, requiring that the petition be filed after the expiration of four years, etc.
2. Same — Practice.
The question as to whether a pardon from the Governor‘has the effect of releasing a prisoner, convicted and imprisoned for an infamous crime, from the consequences of his offense to the same extent as if the offense had never been committed, and for that reason he was entitled to be restored to his citizenship, can only be presented when his right of suffrage and registration, or other right of citizenship, which he exei-eised before the commission of the offense, has been denied.
Appeal by petitioner from Ferguson, J., at September Term, 1912, of Johnston. (
Tbe facts are sufficiently stated in tbe opinion of tbe Court by Mr. Justice Brown.
Tbis petition was filed in tbe Superior Court of Jobnston County by tbe petitioner under section 2680 of tbe Revisal for restoration to citizenship. His Honor denied tbe petition, and the petitioner appealed.
F. II. Broolcs for petitioner.

Opinion:
BROWN, J.
Tbe petitioner was convicted in tbe Superior Court of Jobnston County for murder in tbe second degree at September Term, 1911, and sentenced to twenty years in tbe State's Prison.
Tbe petitioner was pardoned by tbe Governor, and tbe same presented to tbe Superior Court of Jobnston County at March Term, 1912, and tbe prisoner was released.
It is evident tbat .tbe Superior Court bad no jurisdiction to grant tbe prayer of tbe petitioner. Under chapter 64 of tbe Revisal of 1905, secs. 2675, 2676, etc., a prisoner convicted of an infamous crime and sentenced to imprisonment may file bis petition for restoration to citizenship at any time after tbe expiration of four years from tbe date of conviction.
Section 2680 provides dhat where tbe judgment of tbe court does not include imprisonment, and pardon has been granted by tbe Governor, or judgment suspended on payment of tbe costs, and the costs have been paid, such person may be restored to such forfeited rights of citizenship upon application, by petition to tbe judge presiding at any term of the Superior Court held for tbe county in which tbe conviction was bad, which petition must be filed after tbe expiration of one year after such conviction.
As imprisonment was a part of tbe judgment of tbe court in this case, this petition cannot be entertained at this time, as tbe prisoner was convicted and sentenced only a year ago.
It is unnecessary for us to consider tbe effect of a pardon. It is very elaborately argued in tbe brief of tbe counsel for tbe petitioner. It may be, as contended, tbat tbe pardon is such an act of grace as releases tbe offender from tbe consequences of bis offense to tbe same extent as if tbe offense bad never been committed. This question cannot be raised in petition for restoration to tbe rights of citizenship under tbe statute, for tbe Court has no jurisdiction to entertain it except at tbe times and for the purposes named in tbe statute.
If tbe petitioner is denied tbe right- of suffrage and registration, or other rights of citizenship which be exercised before the commission of the offense, he may then by proper legal proceedings have the full scope and effect of his pardon determined by the courts.
The petitioner will pay the cost of this appeal.
The judgment dismissing the petition is
Affirmed.