 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re H.M.L.9/6/2005
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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 Appellate Procedure.
H.M.L. (the "juvenile") appeals from adjudication and dispositional orders finding him responsible for assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. ยง 14-32(b) and placing him on level II supervised probation for one year. We affirm.
I. Background
On 28 April 2004, the juvenile visited his friend, M.E., at the home of M.E.'s grandmother. The juvenile was carrying a loaded shotgun when he arrived. M.E. tried, but failed, to convince the juvenile to leave the shotgun at his grandmother's home. Thejuvenile placed the shotgun in his pants and walked with M.E. to the victim's house. Upon entering and ascending the stairs of the victim's house, the juvenile pulled the shotgun out of his pants. The victim requested the juvenile to unload the shotgun and the juvenile appeared to comply with the victim's request. The juvenile purportedly unloaded the gun and the victim placed the gun in her closet.
Around 2:30 a.m., the victim told the juvenile and M.E. that she was tired and suggested they leave. As the juvenile and M.E. prepared to leave the victim's house, M.E. removed the shotgun from the closet and handed it to the juvenile. While juvenile was holding the shotgun, it discharged. After the shotgun fired, the victim testified she turned around, the juvenile dropped the shotgun, and fled.
Later, the victim was informed by her sister that she had been shot. The victim looked into her mirror saw no bleeding, but felt a burning in her back. Two pellets from the shotgun blast had penetrated the victim's left lung. The victim was transported to Duke Hospital for treatment.
On 21 June 2004, the juvenile was found responsible for assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury. The trial court adjudicated the juvenile to be delinquent and placed him on probation. The juvenile appeals.
II. Issues
The juvenile argues the trial court erred by: (1) denying his motion to dismiss for insufficient evidence at the close of the State's evidence; and (2) adjudicating him delinquent when the court's findings of fact fail to support such a conclusion of law.
III. Motion to Dismiss
A. Standard of Review
Our standard of review on a motion to dismiss criminal charges in an adult trial equally applies to a motion to dismiss a juvenile delinquency petition for insufficient evidence. In re Heil, 145 N.C. App. 24, 28, 550 S.E.2d 815, 819 (2001).
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. If so, the motion is properly denied.
Evidence is substantial if it is relevant and adequate to convince a reasonable mind to accept a conclusion. If substantial evidence, whether direct, circumstantial, or both, to support a finding that the offense charged has been committed and that the defendant committed it, the motion to dismiss should be denied and the case goes to the jury.
In considering a motion to dismiss, the trial court must analyze the evidence in the light most favorable to the State and give the State the benefit of every reasonable inference fromthe evidence. The trial court must also resolve any contradictions in the evidence
Page 1 2 3 North Carolina Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|