Criminal Practice — MAR – Statutory Sexual Offense – Indictment Allegations – Victim’s Initials

Our Supreme Court has held that an indictment alleging a sex offense perpetrated against a minor failed to establish jurisdiction in the trial court when it identified a minor as “Victim #1.” State v. White, 372 N.C. 248, 827 S.E.2d 80 (2019). However, State v. Pabon, ___ N.C. App. ___, 850 S.E.2d 512, disc review allowed on other grounds, 376 N.C. 527, 851 S.E.2d 43 (2020), subsequently reasoned that “nothing in White … overturned the common sense understanding that initials represent a person,” and that, consistent with State v. McKoy, 196 N.C. App. 650, 675 S.E.2d 40, appeal dismissed and disc. review denied, 363 N.C. 586, 683 S.E.2d 215 (2009), “it is unnecessary to include the victim’s full name” and an indictment’s “use of the victim’s initials is proper.” We are bound by Pabon to hold that the indictment against defendant for statutory sexual offense with a child by an adult was sufficient to establish jurisdiction in the trial court, despite the indictment’s use of initials to identify the victim.

We affirm the superior court’s denial of defendant’s motion for appropriate relief.

State v. Cathcart (Lawyers Weekly No. 012-181-21, 6 pp.) (Valerie Zachary, J.) Appealed from Mecklenburg County Superior Court (Carla Archie, J.) Sherri Horner Lawrence for the state; Allen Brotherton for defendant. 2021-NCCOA-286