 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
North Carolina v. Webster5/4/1989
staining the objection to the testimony prevented defendant from completing his side of the story. If defendant had been able to present the excluded testimony, he might have been able to convince the jury that he shot Jeffries while under a reasonable belief that it was necessary to do so in order to save himself from death or great bodily harm. Thus, there is a reasonable possibility that, had the error not been committed, a different result would have been reached at trial. N.C.G.S. § 15A-1443 (1988).
Our decision finds support in previous decisions of this Court and the Court of Appeals involving the exclusion of evidence offered by defendants in self-defense homicide cases. See State v. Spaulding, 298 N.C. 149, 159, 257 S.E.2d 391, 397 (prejudicial error to exclude self-defense evidence that defendant knew the victim would be dangerous and evidence of pervasive fear of physical harm in defendant's environment); State v. Miller, 282 N.C. 633, 642, 194 S.E.2d 353, 359 (1973) (prejudicial error to exclude self-defense evidence of defendant's apprehension that he was about to suffer death); State v. Erby, 56 N.C. App. 358, 360, 289 S.E.2d 86, 88 (1982) (prejudicial error to exclude self-defense evidence about why defendant carried a loaded gun).
We find it unnecessary to discuss defendant's other assignments of error since they are not likely to recur at a new trial.
New trial.
Disposition
New trial.
|