NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 7 August v. Onslow County Nos. 10 CRS CRS JAMES ERIC MARSLENDER
|
|
- Holly King
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 7 August 2012 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. Onslow County Nos. 10 CRS CRS JAMES ERIC MARSLENDER Appeal by Defendant from judgments entered 22 July 2011 by Judge Phyllis M. Gorham in Superior Court, Onslow County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 3 April Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Special Deputy Attorney General Jennie Wilhelm Hauser, for the State. Geoffrey W. Hosford for Defendant-Appellant. McGEE, Judge. James Eric Marslender (Defendant) was indicted on 8 February 2011 on charges of driving while impaired, seconddegree murder, failing to secure a passenger under the age of sixteen in a vehicle, and exceeding safe speed, all alleged to have occurred on 26 September At trial on 18 July 2011, the trial court denied Defendant's motions to dismiss at the
2 -2- close of the State's evidence and at the close of all evidence. The jury found Defendant guilty of driving while impaired and of second-degree murder. The trial court sentenced Defendant to 144 months to 182 months in prison. Defendant appeals. I. Factual Background Defendant was driving his truck eastbound on Highway 24 in Onslow County on the evening of 26 September Defendant's son, James Eric Marslender, II, was riding with Defendant. At about 8:10 p.m., Defendant's truck collided with a tree located in the highway median, and Defendant's son was killed. Rebecca Ann Silvia (Ms. Silvia) was driving in the right-hand eastbound lane of Highway 24. Ms. Silvia testified that she witnessed Defendant's truck pass her in the left-hand lane as "heavy rains" began to fall. From a distance of "about one to two car lengths," Ms. Silvia witnessed Defendant's truck "sp[i]n out of control into the median and [wrap] around a tree." Ms. Silvia testified that she was not sure exactly what happened to cause the collision, but that she "figured overcompensating." Police officers responding to the accident scene noted that Defendant "smelled like beer" and the officers administered a horizontal gaze and nystagmus test to Defendant, the results of which indicated impairment. Defendant was given a blood test at
3 -3- the hospital at 9:50 p.m. that showed Defendant had a blood alcohol content of.12. Officer Brittany Hall testified that, upon arriving at the scene, she examined Defendant's son and attempted to locate a pulse but was unable to do so. Dr. John Almeida (Dr. Almeida) performed an autopsy on Defendant's son the following morning and determined that the child died from "blunt head trauma, secondary to a motor vehicle accident." The State presented evidence of Defendant's two prior driving while impaired convictions that showed Defendant had been convicted of "DWI, level five" in Cabarrus County on 19 August 1997, and of "[DWI], level two" in Onslow County on 30 October At trial, Defendant did not object to the introduction of evidence of his two prior driving while impaired convictions. During cross-examination, the State questioned Defendant about an incident that occurred in Ohio in 2008 and Defendant testified that, after drinking in a motel room, he drove his son and two other minors "through the parking lot" of the motel to a restaurant. Defendant testified that he got a flat tire and that the incident was reported to "the department of social services[.]" II. Issues on Appeal
4 -4- Defendant raises on appeal the issues of whether: (1) the trial court correctly denied Defendant's motion to dismiss the charge of second-degree murder; and (2) the trial court committed plain error when, without prior notice, it allowed the State to impeach Defendant during cross-examination with prior driving while impaired convictions from 2000 and 1997; and Defendant argues the trial court also erred when it allowed the State to cross-examine Defendant as to the incident in Ohio in 2008 in which Defendant consumed alcohol and drove a vehicle with his son and two other minors present in the vehicle. III. Motion to Dismiss Defendant argues that the trial court erred by denying his motion to dismiss the charge of second-degree murder. Defendant contends that "the State did not introduce substantial evidence that [Defendant's] act was the proximate cause of the death of his son." Upon review of the evidence presented at trial, we find that the State did present such evidence and, therefore, the trial court properly denied Defendant's motion to dismiss. Upon reviewing a trial court's denial of a motion to dismiss, "we must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, giving the State the benefit of all reasonable inferences." State v. Benson, 331 N.C. 537, 544, 417 S.E.2d
5 -5-756, 761 (1992). We then consider de novo 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. If the evidence is sufficient only to raise a suspicion or conjecture as to either the commission of the offense or the identity of the defendant as the perpetrator of it, the motion should be allowed. State v. Scott, 356 N.C. 591, 595, 573 S.E.2d 866, 868 (2002) (citations omitted). "Substantial evidence is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." State v. Smith, 300 N.C. 71, 78-79, 265 S.E.2d 164, 169 (1980) (citation omitted). Contradictions and discrepancies must be resolved in favor of the State, and a defendant's evidence, unless favorable to the State, is not to be taken into consideration. State v. Earnhardt, 307 N.C. 62, 67, 296 S.E.2d 649, 653 (1982). Defendant argues that "[t]he State offered no evidence from which a rational trier of fact could conclude that the collision with the tree was the natural result of driving while impaired." Evidence of Defendant's driving while impaired is not sufficient, in itself, to support a finding of proximate cause. The trial court must also consider "the element[s] of causal
6 -6- relation, and... proximate cause; for mere proof of a negligent act does not establish its causal relation to the injury." State v. Lowery, 223 N.C. 598, 603, 27 S.E.2d 638, 641 (1943). See also State v. McGill, 314 N.C. 633, 637, 336 S.E.2d 90, 93 (1985) (holding that "when a death is caused by one who was driving under the influence of alcohol," successful prosecution depends on demonstrating "the causal link between that violation and the death"). However, upon review of the evidence presented at trial in the present case, it is clear that the State did present substantial evidence to support a causal link between Defendant's driving while impaired and the collision that resulted in the death of Defendant's son. During direct examination by the State, Ms. Silvia was asked: [THE STATE:] And when you -- when you state to the court that you observed the white vehicle begin to go out of control, what do you mean by that, ma'am? [MS. SILVIA:] It looked like -- I saw the vehicle pull to the right, I figured overcompensating. I wasn't sure what happened. He was about one to two car lengths ahead of me. Then I saw it start to spin out of control, and I was slowing down because of rain, so I pulled over to the side. [THE STATE:] About how fast were you traveling, at that point in time?
7 -7- [MS. SILVIA:] About 50, 55 miles per hour. [THE STATE:] And it was clear to you that the white truck was passing you? A. Yes, sir. We find Ms. Silvia's testimony sufficient to allow a jury to reasonably infer that Defendant's impairment caused him to overcorrect. Our Supreme Court has held that, to show a defendant's intoxication proximately caused a victim's death, "only one causal link must be shown that between the intoxication and the death." McGill, 314 N.C. at 633, 336 S.E.2d at 90. When Ms. Silvia's testimony is considered in the light most favorable to the State, and with all reasonable inferences in favor of the State, a jury could reasonably determine that her testimony established a causal link between Defendant's driving while impaired and the death of Defendant's son. Accordingly, we find that Defendant's motion to dismiss was properly denied. IV. Impeachment Defendant next argues that the trial court committed plain error by admitting evidence of Defendant's two prior convictions for driving while impaired from 1997 and 2000 to impeach him. Further, Defendant contends that the State spent a significant amount of time questioning Defendant about an alleged incident
8 -8- where he was "drinking and driving with the minors in his truck, in 2008." Defendant contends that the questioning was "offered simply to show that [Defendant] drank alcohol in the past and had an accident with minors in his truck, demonstrating that he acted in conformity with his character on 26 September 2010." Defendant states that our appellate courts have "approved the introduction of a defendant's driving record, including prior convictions as evidence of malice." Defendant also concedes that, in the present case, "the introduction of the prior convictions for driving while impaired was proper as to the element of malice[.]" Defendant asserts that "[t]he prosecution, however, chose to impeach [Defendant] with these prior convictions to which he did not object and the trial court did not intervene." We note that Defendant's argument on this issue refers to the State's "line of questioning" but does not include a citation to the transcript to show us what questioning Defendant now challenges. Reviewing the transcript, we find only the following references to Defendant's prior convictions. The State examined Jayne Vlassis (Ms. Vlassis), a supervisor in the criminal division of the Clerk of Court's Office in Onslow County. Ms. Vlassis authenticated the records of two prior impaired driving convictions of Defendant. After
9 -9- Defendant's driving record was admitted into evidence, the following exchange occurred: THE COURT: Do you want me to give the instruction on these charges now, or had you rather wait to give it to them? [THE STATE]: That's up to [DEFENSE COUNSEL]. [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: I'm sorry, I didn't hear that. [THE STATE]: Do you want a special instruction about the convictions now, or do you want to wait and have it at the end? [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: I think we'll wait until the instructions. THE COURT: Okay. All right. Later, the State and Defendant engaged in the following exchange during the State's cross-examination of Defendant: [THE STATE:] So you're saying alcohol had nothing do with [the accident], is that right? [Defendant:] No, sir, not that accident. [THE STATE:] But you know driving while impaired is illegal. [Defendant:] Yes, sir. [THE STATE:] You've been convicted of it twice before this day, haven't you? [Defendant:] Yes, sir. [THE STATE:] And you know driving while impaired is a reckless act, don't you? [Defendant:] Yes, sir.
10 -10- [THE STATE:] Which is dangerous to human life. Don't you? [Defendant:] Yes, sir. [THE STATE:] I mean, you knew that before September 26th, 2010, because you had been to court and been convicted of driving while impaired twice before then. Is that true? [Defendant:] Yes, sir. The above testimony of Defendant was the only time the State questioned Defendant about his prior convictions and, contrary to Defendant's argument, we do not construe that line of questioning as impeachment. The State's closing argument supports this interpretation as well, as the references to Defendant's prior convictions were all made in the following manner: What we're talking about is a different kind of malice, a kind of malice that is supported by the law and has been accepted by the courts that is specific in driving while impaired cases. And if you remember back during jury selection we began discussing this. Remember when I said to you, how many of you think you can't use someone's past against them? You shook your head. And I said to you, well, there will come a time in this case that you'll hear about the defendant's prior convictions, and the court will tell you that you can use those as evidence of malice. And each of you agreed to follow the law about that. So we have introduced evidence of his prior convictions to show malice. The clerk of court, Jayne Vlassis, came to court. She
11 -11- testified about the two prior convictions that [Defendant] had for driving while impaired, one in Cabarrus County, one here. So how do you take those two prior convictions and fit those into the definition of malice? Well, the court is going to give you an additional definition of malice, which may be of help to you..... To review: Prior convictions for driving while impaired, the law says you can consider those as evidence of malice. That's taken from a case. The prior driving while impaired arrest should have alerted him to the hazards of driving while impaired. That's what the courts have said about this issue. Thus, we find that the State did not impeach Defendant with evidence of his prior convictions and find Defendant's argument without merit. The trial court did, however, provide a jury instruction titled: " impeachment of the defendant as a witness by proof of unrelated crime." The charge conference occurred off the record, but the trial court afterward recited the jury instructions it intended to provide and allowed the parties to object in the following exchange: THE COURT: Motions are denied. We will move into our charge conference. I intend to charge the jury beginning with , function of the jury; , burden of proof and reasonable doubt; , credibility of witness; , weight of the evidence; , circumstantial evidence; , testimony of interested witness; , testimony of expert witness; , evidence related to the
12 -12- character of a witness, including the defendant, for truthfulness; impeachment of the defendant as a witness by proof of unrelated crime; , photographs as illustrative evidence, , second-degree murder by vehicle, including involuntary manslaughter; , accident; , failure to secure a child in a restraint system; , driving too fast for conditions; A, impaired driving; , making notes by jurors, and concluding instructions. Any additions, corrections, comments, regarding these instructions from the state...? [THE STATE]: No, no, ma'am. THE COURT: [Defense Counsel]? [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: No, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. I'll have the clerk to print off rough drafts of the instructions for your review overnight, and I'll hear you in the morning regarding any additional corrections on the instructions. The trial court instructed the jury and allowed the parties the opportunity to object as follows: When evidence has been received that, at an earlier time, the defendant was convicted of criminal charges, you may consider this evidence for one purpose only. If, in considering the nature of the crimes, you believe that this bears on truthfulness, then you may consider it, together with all other facts and circumstances bearing upon the defendant's truthfulness, in deciding whether you will believe or disbelieve the defendant's testimony at this trial. It is not evidence of the defendant's guilt in this case. You must not convict the
13 -13- defendant on the present charge because of something the defendant may have done in the past..... THE COURT: Any comments, corrections regarding the instructions, from the state? [THE STATE]: No, ma'am. THE COURT: From the defense...? [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: No, Your Honor. Defense counsel therefore clearly had an opportunity to object to the jury instructions, but did not do so. Defendant makes no argument concerning the propriety of the jury instructions. We have concluded that the State did not impeach Defendant with evidence of his prior convictions, and any irregularity in the trial court's having instructed the jury on impeachment was neither preserved at trial nor argued by Defendant on appeal. We therefore find no plain error as to this argument. Defendant next argues that the trial court committed plain error by allowing the State to impeach Defendant by questioning him concerning an alleged incident in another state in 2008 (the 2008 incident). Defendant argues that "[t]he State's questioning of the alleged incident in Ohio in 2008 served only to try to show that [Defendant] had a history of excessive drinking and that he drove with minors in his truck, getting
14 -14- into an accident with them." However, we note that this argument suffers from the same procedural defects as Defendant's argument concerning his prior convictions in that Defendant failed to preserve the issue for review by: (1) not objecting during the questioning, (2) not objecting to the jury instructions, and (3) not citing, in his brief, the particular testimony in question. Further, regarding plain error, Defendant concludes his argument with the following: As such, the trial court committed plain error in allowing the State to question [Defendant] about the incident. This line of questioning deprived him of a fair trial. The error is plain and is aggravated based upon the State's immediately preceding questioning of him about his prior driving while impaired convictions. The cumulative effect of the improper crossexamination resulted in plain error. It had to have had an impact on the jury's determination. The jury had heard about the dated convictions and then also heard about [Defendant]'s alleged consumption of eighteen beers and an entire bottle of vodka right before having another accident with other children in his truck. That evidence had a probable impact in the juror's minds as to [Defendant]'s propensity or character. Defendant's plain error argument is that the alleged error involved in the questioning concerning the 2008 incident amounted to plain error because it was compounded by the alleged error arising from the criminal record inquiry. As we have concluded there was no error in the State's questioning
15 -15- concerning Defendant's prior criminal record, we find Defendant's argument is without merit. No error in part; no plain error in part. Judges STEPHENS and HUNTER, JR. concur. Report per Rule 30(e).
NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 16 October 2012
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)
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 17 March 2015
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)
More informationSTATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, v. GEORGE ERVIN ALLEN, JR., Defendant NO. COA03-406
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, v. GEORGE ERVIN ALLEN, JR., Defendant NO. COA03-406 Filed: 1 June 2004 1. Motor Vehicles--driving while impaired--sufficiency of evidence There was sufficient evidence of driving
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 16 August v. Rowan County Nos. 06 CRS CRS NICHOLAS JERMAINE STEELE
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)
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA15-4. Filed: 15 September 2015
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)
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 6 August v. Wake County No. 06 CRS ADAM DERBYSHIRE
NO. COA12-1382 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 6 August 2013 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. Wake County No. 06 CRS 101768 ADAM DERBYSHIRE Search and seizure vehicular stop reasonable suspicion weaving
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 19 April Appeal by defendant from judgments entered 25 February 2010
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)
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 17 January 2017
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)
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO. v. NO. 30,706
This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Please see Rule 1-0 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please also note
More informationPetition for Writ of Certiorari Denied January 19, 1994 COUNSEL
1 STATE V. CAVANAUGH, 1993-NMCA-152, 116 N.M. 826, 867 P.2d 1208 (Ct. App. 1993) STATE of New Mexico, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Patrick CAVANAUGH, Defendant-Appellant No. 14,480 COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED June 22, 2010 v No. 291273 St. Clair Circuit Court MICHAEL ARTHUR JOYE, LC No. 08-001637-FH Defendant-Appellant.
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 4 April 2017
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)
More informationCourt of Appeals. First District of Texas
Opinion issued October 1, 2013. In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-11-00975-CR STEVE OLIVARES, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law
More informationNOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NUMBER 2010 KA 1446 STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS YILVER MORADEL PONCE Judgment Rendered March 25 2011 Appealed from the Twenty
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE MARCH SESSION, 1995
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE MARCH SESSION, 1995 FILED September 11, 1995 STATE OF TENNESSEE, Cecil Crowson, Jr. ) C.C.A. NO. 03C01-9406-CR-00231 Appellate Court Clerk ) Appellee,
More informationFOR PUBLICATION April 24, :05 a.m. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v No Jackson Circuit Court. Defendant-Appellee.
S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N C O U R T O F A P P E A L S PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, FOR PUBLICATION April 24, 2018 9:05 a.m. v No. 337003 Jackson Circuit Court GREGORY SCOTT
More informationState of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department
State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department Decided and Entered: March 29, 2012 103699 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ROBERT CAROTA
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 5 November On writ of certiorari to review order entered 29 May 2012
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)
More information2018COA167. No. 16CA0749 People v. Johnston Constitutional Law Fourth Amendment Searches and Seizures Motor Vehicles
The summaries of the Colorado Court of Appeals published opinions constitute no part of the opinion of the division but have been prepared by the division for the convenience of the reader. The summaries
More informationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina. STATE of North Carolina v. Alvaro Rafael CASTILLO. No. COA Decided: July 19, 2011
Court of Appeals of North Carolina. STATE of North Carolina v. Alvaro Rafael CASTILLO. No. COA10 814. Decided: July 19, 2011 Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General John G. Barnwell
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 4 January Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 4 December 2009 by
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)
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 1 November 2016
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)
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs February 26, 2002
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs February 26, 2002 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JEFF L. COURTNEY, III Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Hamblen County No.
More informationNOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 117,102 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, DYLAN R. HARVEY, Appellant.
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION No. 117,102 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. DYLAN R. HARVEY, Appellant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Affirmed. Appeal from Jackson District
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 4 November Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 9 September 2013
NO. COA14-390 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 4 November 2014 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. Buncombe County No. 11 CRS 63608 MATTHEW SMITH SHEPLEY Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 9 September
More informationCASE REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS. Division IV Opinion by: JUDGE TERRY Casebolt and Webb, JJ., concur. Announced: May 1, 2008
COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals No.: 05CA1051 Douglas County District Court No. 03CR691 Honorable Thomas J. Curry, Judge The People of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ronald Brett
More informationFourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-14-00025-CR Frances Rosalez FORD, Appellant v. The The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County,
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF HOWELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED December 19, 2006 V No. 261228 Livingston Circuit Court JASON PAUL AMELL, LC No. 04-020876-AZ Defendant-Appellee.
More informationfihj oj 9lidinumd on g fltumdtuj tire 16tft dtuj oj fjei'pau:vaj, 2017.
VIRGINIA: Jn tire Supwne &.ud oj ViMJinia fleld at tire Supwne &.ud fijuii!tj.ing in tire fihj oj 9lidinumd on g fltumdtuj tire 16tft dtuj oj fjei'pau:vaj, 2017. Orlando A. Cruz, Appellant, against Record
More informationNORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 5 June STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA Guilford County v. No. 04 CRS 83182
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)
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 17 February Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 12 September 2002 by
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)
More informationSTATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF LORAIN ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
[Cite as State v. Jarvis, 2015-Ohio-4219.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF LORAIN ) STATE OF OHIO Appellee C.A. No. 14CA010667 v. KRISTOPHER L. JARVIS Appellant
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT JACKSON COUNTY APPEARANCES: C. Michael Moore, Jackson, Ohio, for appellant.
[Cite as State v. Fizer, 2002-Ohio-6807.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT JACKSON COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, : : Plaintiff-Appellee, : : v. : Case No. 02CA4 : MARSHA D. FIZER, : DECISION
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA. No / Filed May 11, Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Gregory D.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 1-215 / 10-1349 Filed May 11, 2011 STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. MATTHEW JOHN PAYNE, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County,
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 18 September 2007
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)
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT In Case No. 2016-0345, State of New Hampshire v. Joshua J. DeBoer, the court on April 12, 2017, issued the following order: Having considered the parties briefs
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 1 May Appeal by defendant from judgments entered 16 March 2017 by Judge W.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA No. COA17-968 Filed: 1 May 2018 Johnston County, Nos. 16CRS052218 19 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. DAVID HINES, JR. Appeal by defendant from judgments entered 16
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO. v. NO. 29,303
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO STATE OF NEW MEXICO, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NO.,0 KEVIN JORDAN, Defendant-Appellant. 1 1 1 1 1 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY Neil
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO Opinion Number: 2016-NMCA-058 Filing Date: April 18, 2016 Docket No. 33,823 STATE OF NEW MEXICO, v. Plaintiff-Appellee, JESS CARPENTER, Defendant-Appellant.
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON. STATE OF TENNESSEE v. BILLY HANCOCK
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON STATE OF TENNESSEE v. BILLY HANCOCK Appeal as of Right from the Criminal Court for Shelby County No. 98-12271, 98-12272, 98-12273, 98-12275, 98-12276
More informationv No Wayne Circuit Court
S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N C O U R T O F A P P E A L S PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED October 31, 2017 v No. 330759 Wayne Circuit Court THABO MANGEDWA JONES, LC No.
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE SEPTEMBER 1996 SESSION
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE SEPTEMBER 1996 SESSION FILED December 3, 1996 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate Court Clerk STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) ) C.C.A. NO. 03C01-9605-CC-00189
More informationS08A1636. SANFORD v. THE STATE. A jury found Alvin Dexter Sanford guilty of malice murder, felony murder,
Final Copy 284 Ga. 785 S08A1636. SANFORD v. THE STATE. Hines, Justice. A jury found Alvin Dexter Sanford guilty of malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault (with a deadly weapon), possession of
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE JANUARY 2000 SESSION. STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) ) Appellee, ) C.C.A. No. 03C CR )
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE JANUARY 2000 SESSION FILED February 10, 2000 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate Court Clerk STATE OF TENNESSEE, Appellee, C.C.A. No. 03C01-9906-CR-00227
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 17 December v. New Hanover County No. 12 CRS FREDERICK L. WEAVER
NO. COA13-578 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 17 December 2013 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. New Hanover County No. 12 CRS 53818 FREDERICK L. WEAVER Appeal by the State from order entered 27 March
More informationIn the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District
In the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District STEVE SAUNDERS, v. KATHLEEN BASKA, Appellant, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) WD75405 FILED: April 16, 2013 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PLATTE COUNTY THE
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT MONTGOMERY COUNTY
[Cite as State v. Barker, 191 Ohio App.3d 293, 2010-Ohio-5744.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT MONTGOMERY COUNTY THE STATE OF OHIO, : Appellate Case No. 23691 Appellee, : : Trial
More informationNo. 46,976-KA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *
Judgment rendered February 29, 2012. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by art. 922, La. C. Cr. P. No. 46,976-KA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * *
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs August 26, 2008
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs August 26, 2008 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JOHN WILLIAM GAY Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Bradley County No. M-06-469
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 2 December Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 17 August 2007 by Court of Appeals
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)
More informationTEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-13-00016-CR The State of Texas, Appellant v. Tri Minh Tran, Appellee FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 3 OF TRAVIS COUNTY, NO. C-1-CR-11-215115,
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE May 11, 2005 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE May 11, 2005 Session CARL ROBERSON, ET AL. v. MOTION INDUSTRIES, INC., ET AL. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hamilton County No. 02C701 W. Neil Thomas,
More informationI N T H E COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res
More informationBLOOD TESTS SINCE MCNEELY by Walter I. Butch Jenkins III Thigpen and Jenkins, LLP. Biscoe, NC INTRODUCTION
BLOOD TESTS SINCE MCNEELY by Walter I. Butch Jenkins III Thigpen and Jenkins, LLP. Biscoe, NC INTRODUCTION Defending a driving while impaired case is a daunting task in itself. When the State has a blood
More informationSTATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. BRYAN KEITH HESS NO. COA Filed: 21 August 2007
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. BRYAN KEITH HESS NO. COA06-1413 Filed: 21 August 2007 Search and Seizure investigatory stop vehicle owned by driver with suspended license reasonable suspicion An officer had
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs August 2, 2016
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs August 2, 2016 ALVIN WALLER, JR. v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal from the Circuit Court for Madison County No. C-14-297 Donald H.
More informationDefense Motion for Mistrial
Defense Motion for Mistrial MR. RICHARD C. MOSTY: Your Honor, 11 could we take care of a housekeeping matter? 12 THE COURT: We sure can. Just a 13 moment. 14 All right. Ladies and gentlemen of 15 the jury,
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs May 17, 2017, at Knoxville
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs May 17, 2017, at Knoxville 06/20/2017 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. CHRISTOPHER COLLIER Appeal from the Criminal Court for Shelby County
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 106,696. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, JASON LEE BRAMMER, Appellant. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS No. 106,696 STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. JASON LEE BRAMMER, Appellant. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. The legislature did not intend to create alternative means of
More informationCOMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : Plaintiff, : 608 MDA 2014 vs. : : DOCKET NO. CR JASON EDWARD BEAMER, :
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF LYCOMING COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : Plaintiff, : 608 MDA 2014 vs. : : DOCKET NO. CR-854-2013 JASON EDWARD BEAMER, : Defendant. : CRIMINAL Issued
More informationS07A1352. LEWIS v. THE STATE. Defendant Jeffrey Daniel Lewis was convicted of the felony murder of
FINAL COPY 283 Ga. 191 S07A1352. LEWIS v. THE STATE. Thompson, Justice. Defendant Jeffrey Daniel Lewis was convicted of the felony murder of Richard Golden and possession of a firearm during the commission
More informationv No St. Clair Circuit Court
S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N C O U R T O F A P P E A L S PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED October 30, 2018 v No. 337354 St. Clair Circuit Court RICKY EDWARDS, LC No. 16-002145-FH
More informationIn the Court of Appeals of Georgia
FOURTH DIVISION DOYLE, P. J., MCFADDEN and BOGGS, JJ. NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed.
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 5 April v. Guilford County Nos. 09 CRS 80644, EDEM KWAME KALEY
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)
More informationNOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT EDWARD JAMES HOWARD, Appellant, v. Case No. 2D13-3008 STATE OF
More informationCommonwealth v. Glick -- No Knisely, J. March 5, 2014 Criminal Evidence Suppression DUI Non-investigable offenses.
Commonwealth v. Glick -- No. 3218-2013 Knisely, J. March 5, 2014 Criminal Evidence Suppression DUI Non-investigable offenses. Defendant s suppression motion denied where officer saw vehicle abruptly change
More informationNO. COA14-94 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 16 September Appeal by plaintiff from order entered 2 August 2013 by
NO. COA14-94 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 16 September 2014 KAYLA J. INMAN v. Columbus County No. 12 CVS 561 CITY OF WHITEVILLE, a municipality incorporated under the laws of the State of North
More informationPRESENT: Keenan, Koontz, Kinser, Lemons, Goodwyn, and Millette, JJ., and Lacy, S.J.
PRESENT: Keenan, Koontz, Kinser, Lemons, Goodwyn, and Millette, JJ., and Lacy, S.J. DOUGLAS MICHAEL BROWN, JR. v. Record No. 090013 OPINION BY JUSTICE BARBARA MILANO KEENAN November 5, 2009 COMMONWEALTH
More informationCourt of Appeals of Ohio
[Cite as State v. Dykas, 185 Ohio App 3d 763, 2010-Ohio-359.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 92683 THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. DYKAS,
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED October 25, 2002 APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION December 27, 2002 9:05 a.m. v No. 226394 Oakland Circuit Court
More informationPresent: Carrico, C.J., Compton, Lacy, Hassell, Keenan, and Koontz, JJ., and Whiting, Senior Justice
Present: Carrico, C.J., Compton, Lacy, Hassell, Keenan, and Koontz, JJ., and Whiting, Senior Justice ROBIN R. YOUNG, ET AL. v. Record No. 961032 OPINION BY JUSTICE BARBARA MILANO KEENAN February 28, 1997
More informationv. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE BARBARA MILANO KEENAN Record No June 9, 2005
PRESENT: All the Justices RODNEY L. DIXON, JR. v. Record No. 041952 OPINION BY JUSTICE BARBARA MILANO KEENAN Record No. 041996 June 9, 2005 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I. ---o0o--- STATE OF HAWAI I, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee, vs.
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCWC-15-0000402 16-MAY-2018 09:41 AM IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I ---o0o--- STATE OF HAWAI I, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. RACHEL VIAMOANA UI, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant.
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED May 8, 2012 v No. 304225 Ingham Circuit Court PERCY MONTE HARRISON, LC No. 09-00148-FH Defendant-Appellant.
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED August 20, 2002 v No. 230376 Kent Circuit Court STEVEN WAYNE ADAMS, LC No. 99-010690-FH Defendant-Appellant.
More informationDAMON PHINEAS JORDAN OPINION BY v. Record No JUSTICE DONALD W. LEMONS September 12, 2013 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
PRESENT: All the Justices DAMON PHINEAS JORDAN OPINION BY v. Record No. 121835 JUSTICE DONALD W. LEMONS September 12, 2013 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA In this appeal,
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LAWRENCE COUNTY APPEARANCES:
[Cite as State v. Cooper, 170 Ohio App.3d 418, 2007-Ohio-1186.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LAWRENCE COUNTY The State of Ohio, : Appellee, : Case No. 06CA4 v. : Cooper, :
More informationTAB 13: Closing Arguments
TAB 13: Closing Arguments CLOSING ARGUMENTS IN THE GUILT AND PENALTY PHASES OF A CAPITAL TRIAL Jeff Welty Plan General Rules Guilt phase Order, number, and timing Harbison/admitting guilt to a lesser offense
More informationJoseph R. Burkard and Matthew A. Miller for Appellee
[Cite as State v. Shaffer, 2013-Ohio-3581.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT PAULDING COUNTY STATE OF OHIO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, CASE NO. 11-13-02 v. KIMBERLY JO SHAFFER, O P I N
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO. v. NO. 27,291. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF MORA COUNTY Eugenio S. Mathis, District Judge
0 0 This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Reports. Please see Rule -0 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please also note that
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO. Plaintiffs-Appellants : C.A. CASE NO
[Cite as Carder v. Kettering, 2004-Ohio-4260.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO TERRY D. CARDER, et al. : Plaintiffs-Appellants : C.A. CASE NO. 20219 v. : T.C. CASE NO. 2003 CV 1640
More informationS09A0155. TIMMRECK v. THE STATE. A jury found Christopher Franklin Timmreck guilty of the malice murder
Final Copy 285 Ga. 39 S09A0155. TIMMRECK v. THE STATE. Carley, Justice. A jury found Christopher Franklin Timmreck guilty of the malice murder of Brian Anderson. The trial court entered judgment of conviction
More informationSTATE V. CLEMONTS, 2006-NMCA-031, 139 N.M. 147, 130 P.3d 208 STATE OF NEW MEXICO, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ALONZO CLEMONTS, Defendant-Appellant.
1 STATE V. CLEMONTS, 2006-NMCA-031, 139 N.M. 147, 130 P.3d 208 STATE OF NEW MEXICO, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ALONZO CLEMONTS, Defendant-Appellant. Docket No. 23,549 COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO 2006-NMCA-031,
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 7 May v. Johnston County Nos. 10 CRS 57277, CRS 5365
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)
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA. No / Filed June 13, Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek County, Daniel F.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 7-149 / 06-1048 Filed June 13, 2007 ARCHIE ROBERT BEAR, Applicant-Appellant, vs. STATE OF IOWA, Respondent-Appellee. Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Poweshiek
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 18 December v. Catawba County No. 10 CRS 1038 MATTHEW LEE ELMORE
NO. COA12-459 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 18 December 2012 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. Catawba County No. 10 CRS 1038 MATTHEW LEE ELMORE Motor Vehicles death by motor vehicle and manslaughter
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE JANUARY 1999 SESSION STATE OF TENNESSEE, * C.C.A. # 03C CC-00009
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE FILED July 1, 1999 JANUARY 1999 SESSION Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate Court Clerk STATE OF TENNESSEE, * C.C.A. # 03C01-9801-CC-00009 Appellee,
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI FILED MAR OFFICE OFTHE CLERK SUPREME COURT COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
GOP~ IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI KRISTOPHER R. PEACOCK VS. FILED MAR 2 6 2007 OFFICE OFTHE CLERK SUPREME COURT COURT OF APPEALS APPELLANT NO. 2005-KA-2190 STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE
More informationJudgment Rendered September
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NUMBER 2006 CA 2351 ADRIAN SLAUGHTER VERSUS SAFEWAY INSURANCE COMPANY OF LOUISIANA ET AL Judgment Rendered September 14 2007
More informationNo. 51,759-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * versus * * * * *
Judgment rendered January 10, 2018. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 2166, La. C.C.P. No. 51,759-CA COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * LARRY
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 21 March 2017
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA No. COA16-988 Filed: 21 March 2017 Wake County, Nos. 15 CRS 215729, 215731-33 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. BREYON BRADFORD, Defendant. Appeal by defendant from judgments
More informationTHE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT In Case No. 2016-0084, State of New Hampshire v. Andrew Tulley, the court on April 26, 2017, issued the following order: Having considered the briefs and record
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 5 June v. Caldwell County Nos. 07 CRS CRS TERRY ALLEN HALL, Defendant.
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)
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 1 September Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 28 February 2014 by Judge
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)
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE
Suttle et al v. Powers et al Doc. 26 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE RALPH E. SUTTLE and JENNIFER SUTTLE, Plaintiff, v. No. 3:15-CV-29-HBG BETH L. POWERS, Defendant.
More informationCOURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA No STATE OF OHIO, : Plaintiff-Appellee : JOURNAL ENTRY. vs.
[Cite as State v. Hooks, 2004-Ohio-1124.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA No. 83193 STATE OF OHIO, : Plaintiff-Appellee : JOURNAL ENTRY vs. : AND KEVIN HOOKS, : OPINION Defendant-Appellant
More informationNO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 4 August v. Onslow County No. 06 CRS CLINT RYAN VLAHAKIS
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)
More informationSTATE OF LOUISIANA NO KA-1148 VERSUS COURT OF APPEAL DANIEL J. MORALES FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * * *
STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS DANIEL J. MORALES * * * * * * * * * * * NO. 2013-KA-1148 COURT OF APPEAL FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA APPEAL FROM ST. BERNARD 34TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 373-789, DIVISION
More informationv No Wayne Circuit Court LC No DL Respondent-Appellant.
S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N C O U R T O F A P P E A L S In re LINDSEY TAYLOR KING, Minor. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Petitioner-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED March 15, 2018 v No. 336706 Wayne Circuit Court
More informationHomicide. Motor Vehicle Offenses Resulting in Death. First Degree Murder. Second Degree Murder. For example. Involuntary Manslaughter
Homicide Motor Vehicle Offenses Resulting in Death Shea Denning School of Government September 28, 2015 First degree murder Second degree murder Involuntary manslaughter Felony death by vehicle Aggravated
More information