 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
[T] State v. Bell5/4/2004
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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.
Chuck Brian Bell ("defendant") was charged by indictments with driving while impaired, seat belt violation, two counts of stop sign violation, simple possession of marijuana, driving while license revoked, possession of an open container of an alcoholic beverage in the passenger area of a vehicle, reckless driving, felony fleeing to elude arrest, and four counts of resisting a public officer. He was found guilty of four counts of resisting a public officer, felony fleeing to elude arrest, driving while license revoked, two counts of stop sign violation, reckless driving, possession of an open container of an alcoholic beverage in the passenger area of a motor vehicle, and failure to wear aseat belt. He was sentenced to an active term of sixty days for the convictions of resisting arrest. The remaining convictions were consolidated for judgment and defendant was sentenced to an active term of nine to eleven months.
The State presented evidence tending to show that shortly after midnight on 3 June 2002, the operator of a pickup truck led Officer B. Roberts ("Officer Roberts") of the Gaston County Police Department on a chase during which the pickup truck failed to stop for two stop signs. The pickup truck was occupied by only one person, who was not wearing a seat belt. The chase ended when the driver of the pickup stopped the vehicle, exited the truck, and jumped over a fence to a residence located at 1041 Crowder's Creek Road in the county. Officer Roberts and two other police officers traced the license tag of the pickup truck to the same address, 1041 Crowder's Creek Road. The officers went to the residence at this address. Ms. Kathy Marlow answered the door and gave the officers permission to search the residence. While conducting the search the officers heard a noise in the attic above the carport. The officers entered the attic and found defendant standing behind the chimney. Defendant refused to come out, forcing the officers to subdue him with a taser gun. Officer Roberts identified defendant as the person who was driving the pickup truck. Officer Roberts also found an open container of cold beer in the pickup truck abandoned by defendant. The officers arrested defendant. As defendant was being transported to the police station, defendant repeatedly banged his head against the window of Officer Roberts'police vehicle and uttered racial slurs to Officer Roberts. He also uttered racial slurs after arriving at the police station.
Defendant stipulated that his license had been revoked. Defendant otherwise did not present any evidence.
Defendant first contends that the court committed plain error by entering judgment for both reckless driving and driving while impaired because those offenses were lesser included crimes of the offense of felony speeding to elude arrest as charged in the indictment. He argues that convictions of all three violate the constitutional guarantee against double jeopardy. By assigning plain error, defendant concedes that he did not bring this issue to the attention of the trial tribunal. The cases consistently hold that the failure of the defendant to raise the issue of double jeopardy in the trial court works a waiver of the right to raise the issue in the appellate division. State v. Elliott, 344 N.C. 242, 277, 475 S.E.2d 202, 218 (1996); State v. Madric, 328 N.C. 223, 231, 400 S.E.2d 31, 36 (1991). Plain error review is "limited to errors in jury instructions and the admission of evi
Page 1 2 North Carolina DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|