State v. Pearce ( 2014 )

An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute
controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in
accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of
A p p e l l a t e P r o c e d u r e .
NO. COA13-1359
NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS
Filed: 15 July 2014
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
v. Mecklenburg County
Nos. 11 CRS 256463
12 CRS 12725
JAMES CECIL PEARCE
Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 30 May 2013 by
Judge Robert C. Ervin in Mecklenburg County Superior Court.
Heard in the Court of Appeals 30 June 2014.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Special Deputy Attorney
General David W. Boone, for the State.
Don Willey for defendant-appellant.
BRYANT, Judge.
Where the State presents substantial independent evidence
corroborating defendant’s confession, the State has met its
burden under the corpus delicti rule.
The State’s evidence established that on 23 December 2011,
officers of the Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department
-2-
responded to an incident at a house located at 1100 Pegram
Street. Officer Michael White, the first officer on the scene,
observed defendant run from the back door of the house, fall
down the back steps, pick himself up, and run off between
neighboring houses. Inside the house, officers found a 9mm
cartridge case on the floor. Believing a firearm had been
discharged in the house, officers began searching the
neighborhood for the weapon. Officers discovered a 9mm semi-
automatic firearm in a trash can in front of a house
approximately 25 to 50 feet behind the house from which
defendant ran. Subsequent testing of the cartridge case found
in the house determined that it was discharged from the firearm
found in the trash can.
Officers located defendant standing beside a house at 1104
Pegram Street, immediately to the left of 1100 Pegram Street,
and took him into custody. The officers placed defendant in the
back seat of a patrol car, where he spoke with Officer White.
While speaking with Officer White, defendant admitted that he
got into an altercation with a man inside 1100 Pegram,
brandished a firearm during the altercation, and discarded the
firearm at a nearby house. In a subsequent interview, defendant
again stated that during the altercation, he “pulled out the gun
-3-
and shot one time into the floor in the kitchen,” and that he
“ran out the back door and ran straight to a trash can and put
the gun inside because I didn’t want to have the gun while
dealing with the police.”
At the close of the State’s evidence, the trial court
denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the charge of possession of
a firearm by a felon. The jury convicted defendant on the
charge of possession of a firearm by a felon, and defendant
entered a guilty plea to attaining the status of an habitual
felon. The trial court sentenced defendant to a term of 82 to
111 months imprisonment. Defendant appeals.
_____________________________
In his sole argument on appeal, defendant contends the
trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss the charge of
possession of a firearm by a felon. We disagree.
“This Court reviews the trial court’s denial of a motion to
dismiss de novo.” State v. Smith, 186 N.C. App. 57, 62, 650
S.E.2d 29, 33 (2007) (citation omitted). “Upon defendant’s
motion for dismissal, the question for the Court is whether
there is substantial evidence (1) of each essential element of
the offense charged, or of a lesser offense included therein,
and (2) of defendant’s being the perpetrator of such offense.
-4-
If so, the motion is properly denied.” State v. Fritsch, 351
N.C. 373, 378, 526 S.E.2d 451, 455 (2000) (citation and
quotation omitted). “Substantial evidence is such relevant
evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
support a conclusion.” State v. Smith, 300 N.C. 71, 78—79, 265
S.E.2d 164, 169 (1980) (citations omitted). “In making its
determination, the trial court must consider all evidence
admitted, whether competent or incompetent, in the light most
favorable to the State, giving the State the benefit of every
reasonable inference and resolving any contradictions in its
favor.” State v. Rose, 339 N.C. 172, 192, 451 S.E.2d 211, 223
(1994) (citation omitted).
Defendant contends the trial court erred in denying his
motion to dismiss the charge of possession of a firearm by a
felon because the State presented insufficient evidence.
Specifically, although defendant concedes the State introduced
substantial evidence that he had a prior felony conviction, he
argues the State’s evidence remained insufficient under the rule
of corpus delicti to support sending this charge to the jury
because his statements were the only evidence that showed he
possessed a firearm.
-5-
“To convict defendant of possession of a firearm by a felon
the state must prove that (1) defendant was previously convicted
of a felony and (2) subsequently possessed a firearm.” State v.
Bradshaw, 366 N.C. 90, 93, 728 S.E.2d 345, 347—48 (2012) (citing
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-415.1(a) (20[13])). It is well established
that “an extrajudicial confession, standing alone, is not
sufficient to sustain a conviction of a crime.” State v. Cox,
___ N.C. ___, ___, 749 S.E.2d 271, 275 (2013) (citation
omitted). When the State relies upon a defendant’s
extrajudicial confession, the corpus delicti rule requires “the
State to present corroborative evidence, independent of the
defendant’s confession, tending to show that (a) the injury or
harm constituting the crime occurred [and] (b) this injury or
harm was done in a criminal manner.” Id. at ___, 749 S.E.2d at
275 (citations and quotation omitted). In applying this rule,
our Courts have held:
[I]t is fundamental that the corroborative
evidence need not . . . in any manner tend
to show that the defendant was the guilty
party. Instead, the rule requires the State
to present evidence tending to show that the
crime in question occurred. The rule does
not require the State to logically exclude
every possibility that the defendant did not
commit the crime.
-6-
Id. at ___, 749 S.E.2d at 275 (citation and quotation omitted).
The requirements of the rule may also be met “if the accused’s
confession is supported by substantial independent evidence
tending to establish its trustworthiness, including facts that
tend to show the defendant had the opportunity to commit the
crime.” State v. Parker, 315 N.C. 222, 236, 337 S.E.2d 487, 495
(1985). “[T]here must be strong corroboration of essential
facts and circumstances embraced in the defendant’s confession.
Corroboration of insignificant facts or those unrelated to the
commission of the crime will not suffice.” Id.Here, responding officers saw defendant flee from a house
and found a discharged 9mm cartridge case inside the house.
Officers discovered a firearm in a trash can in front of a house
that was approximately 25 to 50 feet from the house from which
defendant fled. Forensic testing later determined that the
cartridge case found in the house was ejected during the firing
of the firearm found in the trash can. Officers apprehended
defendant while he was standing beside the house next to that
from which he fled. This evidence strongly corroborates
defendant’s statements that he fired a single shot from a
firearm during an altercation inside the house at 1100 Pegram
Street, ran with the firearm from the house, and discarded the
-7-
firearm in a nearby trash can so it would not be on his person
when he interacted with the police.
As such, the State provided sufficient independent evidence
to meet its burden under the corpus delicti rule. Defendant’s
statements provided substantial evidence that he possessed a
firearm, and defendant’s statements and undisputed evidence of
his prior felony conviction in turn constituted sufficient
evidence to survive defendant’s motion to dismiss the charge of
possession of a firearm by a felon. Accordingly, defendant’s
argument is overruled.
No error.
Judges STROUD and HUNTER, Robert Jr., concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).