 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
North Carolina v. Trexler5/6/1986
raise his blood alcohol level to 0.10 or greater at a relevant time after driving.
We are of the opinion that the majority of the panel in the Court of Appeals mistakenly concluded that State v. Brown, 308 N.C. 181, 301 S.E.2d 89, mandated that defendant's assignment of error be sustained. We initially note that in Parker the Court expressly overruled the language in Brown which is inconsistent with the holding in Parker. Parker, 315 N.C. at 239, 337 S.E.2d at 497. Further, we think that the facts in the instant case distinguish it from Brown. In Brown a mobile home was destroyed by fire while the owner of the home was away. The State's evidence tended to show that the fire was probably not caused by
conditions existing inside the mobile home. On the day the fire occurred, officers found personal property belonging to the owner of the burned home in the defendant's possession. The defendant was carried to the sheriff's office where he signed the following statement: "I, Ricky Brown, burnt down a trailer last night at Sid Jones Trailer Park belonging to Cindy." At the time the statement was signed, the defendant had been drinking, smoking marijuana, and was unable to keep food on his stomach. The jury returned verdicts of guilty of burning personal property and guilty of felonious breaking or entering. The defendant appealed and the Court of Appeals found no error in the defendant's trial. We allowed the defendant's petition for discretionary review and reversed that part of the Court of Appeals' decision holding the defendant guilty of the charge of burning personal property. In so holding, this Court stated:
Even though the defendant's confession identifies him as the person who committed the burning, the State must first establish the corpus delicti, that a crime was in fact committed.
The corpus delicti in this case is the criminal burning of personal property, to-wit Cindy Blackman's mobile home. There is no dispute either that Ms. Blackman's mobile home was destroyed by fire or that the origin of the fire was never discovered. The State presented evidence designed to show that the fire was most probably not the result of some condition present inside the mobile home. However, the State's evidence was insufficient to show the fire had a criminal origin. In fact it is just as reasonable to assume from the State's evidence that the fire was the result of a negligent act or an accident.
Brown, 308 N.C. at 183, 301 S.E.2d at 90.
The statement made by the defendant in Brown was neutral as to criminal intent as related to the charge of burning personal property. Neither did the evidence aliunde the confession tend to support a finding that the crime of burning personal property had occurred.
We therefore hold that the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to dismiss.
Reversed.
Disposition
Reversed.
|