 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Knight7/28/1995
a large quantity of alcohol, which had had an effect on defendant's behavior. During cross-examination by the State, the following exchange occurred:
Q. Would you say you had as much beer to drink as Rickey Knight that night?
A. Close, if not just as much.
Q. Well, did all the beer you drink make you want to go out and cut up somebody like a fish?
[DEFENSE COUNSEL]: Objection. Motion to strike.
THE COURT. Sustained. Disregard that.
A defendant is entitled to a new trial on the basis of an improper question if there is a reasonable possibility that such an improper question affected the outcome of his trial. N.C.G.S. § 15A-1443(a) (1988); State v. Whisenant, 308 N.C. 791, 794-95, 303 S.E.2d 784, 786 (1983). Merely asking an improper question to which an objection is sustained does not automatically result in prejudice to a defendant. State v. Whisenant, 308 N.C. at 794-95, 303 S.E.2d at 786; State v. Campbell, 296 N.C. 394, 399, 250 S.E.2d 228, 231 (1979). When the trial court sustains a defendant's objections to improper questions and instructs the jury to disregard such questions, any possible prejudice to the defendant is cured. State v. Walker, 319 N.C. 651, 655, 356 S.E.2d 344, 346 (1987).
Although the prosecutor's question was improper, there is no reasonable possibility that such an improper question affected the outcome of defendant's trial, in light of all the evidence against defendant, including his own confession conceding his initial participation in the stabbing and his return to ensure the victim was dead. There is no evidence to support defendant's assertion that this question destroyed the fundamental dignity and solemnity of the trial or his assertion that this question led the jurors to take a flippant attitude towards defendant's guilt and this trial. No incompetent evidence was placed before the jury as a result of this question. The trial court properly sustained defendant's objection and instructed the jury to disregard the question. This cured any possible prejudice to defendant from the prosecutor's improper question. This assignment of error is overruled.
Having reviewed the trial transcripts, the record, the briefs of the parties, and oral arguments, we conclude that defendant received a fair trial free of prejudicial error.
NO ERROR.
Disposition
NO ERROR.
|