North Carolina Lawyers Weekly

Even if defendant did not waive his objection when he failed to object to witness testimony about a no-longer-available surveillance video, his argument that the trial court erred in admitting the testimony still fails. The rule of completeness, N.C. R. ...

Defendant complains that, during closing arguments, the prosecutor said (1) “It is an attempt to manipulate you…” (2) “This is an attempt to manipulate you.” (3) “Don’t be manipulated.” and (4) “It is manipulation.” Defendant cites State v. Hembree, 368 ...

On probation for felony drug offenses, defendant had already had her probation extended for four probation violations when she was convicted of two new felony drug offenses and had her probation revoked. Having considered defense counsel’s brief and reviewed the ...

Appellant defendant Melvin and his stepson, defendant Baker, were tried jointly for committing an armed robbery of the Walnut Creek Amphitheater. Although Baker claimed that Melvin, rather than Baker, was the third armed robber, this had no impact on the ...

A deputy sheriff went to leased premises to execute a writ of possession and remove the tenant. When the tenant asked if she could take a shower before the deputy removed her and her companion (defendant), the deputy acquiesced. The ...

Where defendant stipulated that his Georgia marijuana conviction was a felony, the trial court properly classified it as a Class I felony with nothing more from the state. Although Georgia’s armed robbery statute, Ga. Code Ann. § 16-8-41, spells out ...

Determining whether an out-of-state offense is substantially similar to a North Carolina offense is a question of law to be determined by the trial court. As such, defendant’s stipulation that his Virginia convictions were substantially similar to North Carolina offenses ...

Although probation may not be revoked based upon a conviction of a Class 3 misdemeanor, and although possession of marijuana drug paraphernalia, G.S. § 90-113.22A, is a Class 3 misdemeanor, defendant admitted to violating the terms of his probation by ...

At defendant’s trial, the state presented evidence that, after autosomal DNA analysis of the material found under the victim’s fingernails, defendant’s DNA could not be excluded. Although the victim’s own DNA was also found under her fingernails, defendant has not ...

Defendant argues the state presented no evidence of an intent to kill; however, the state presented evidence that (1) defendant suspected that the victim had broken into defendant’s car and stolen his money; (2) defendant coached co-conspirator Washington through a ...