Case Name: STATE v. NANNIE HELTON
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1960-11-23
Citations: 253 N.C. 429
Docket Number: 
Parties: STATE v. NANNIE HELTON.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 253
Pages: 429–430

Head Matter:
STATE v. NANNIE HELTON.
(Filed 23 November, 1960.)
Appeal by defendant from Crissman, J., May 1960 Special Term, Cabarrus Superior Court.
Prosecution upon a warrant charging the defendant with the possession for purpose of sale and selling taxpaid liquors. The attorney for the defendant and the solicitor for the State stipulated: “This case was properly before the Court, having been tried in the Cabar-rus County Recorder’s Court, and an appeal having been taken to the Cabarrus County Superior Court.”
Deputy Sheriff Mullis, a witness for the State, testified in substance that he and another deputy drove to the rear of defendant’s house at 11:50 at night. He went to the back door, knocked, the defendant opened the door and, in response to his request to buy liquor, she invited him into the kitchen where she opened a cabinet containing several pints. He bought one pint of Bourbon Deluxe whisky for which he paid the defendant $3.50. The bottle of whisky was identified and offered in evidence.
The defendant’s attorney, by cross-examination, sought to impeach the testimony of Deputy Mullis; whereupon the State called Deputy Sheriff Atwood who testified he went with Deputy Mullis to the house of the defendant on the night of August 1, 1959. Mullis went to the house and when he came out he had a bottle of whisky. The officer identified the bottle of whisky which had been previously introduced in evidence. The defendant, without offering evidence, made a motion to dismiss, which the court denied. From a verdict of guilty and judgment thereon, she appealed.
T. W. Bruton, Attorney General, Harry W. McGalliard, Assistant Attorney General for the State.
Ann L. McKenzie for defendant, appellant.

Opinion:
PeR Cuhiam.
We have examined all assignments of error, in support of which the defendant has cited authority, or assigned reason or argument. We find them without merit. In the trial below, there is
No error.