From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Wilkerson

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Nov 1, 2002
356 N.C. 418 (N.C. 2002)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

reversing this Court's decision and adopting Judge Wynn's dissent in State v. Wilkerson, 148 N.C. App. 310, 559 S.E.2d 5

Summary of this case from State v. Lofton
See 14 Summaries

Opinion

No. 124A02

Filed 22 November 2002

Evidence-bare fact of prior convictions-absence of testimony by defendant-prejudicial error

The decision of the Court of Appeals affirming defendant's convictions for possession with intent to sell or deliver cocaine and trafficking in cocaine is reversed for the reason stated in the dissenting opinion that the trial court committed prejudicial error in permitting the State to introduce, through the testimony of a deputy clerk of court, the bare fact of defendant's prior convictions for cocaine offenses to show knowledge and intent when defendant did not testify.

Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 148 N.C. App. 310, 559 S.E.2d 5 (2002), finding no error in the judgments entered 16 November 1995 by Greeson, J., in Superior Court, Rockingham County. Heard in the Supreme Court 15 October 2002.

Roy Cooper, Attorney General, by Daniel P. O'Brien, Assistant Attorney General, for the State. Lisa Miles for defendant-appellant.

PER CURIAM.

For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals.

REVERSED.

Summaries of

State v. Wilkerson

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Nov 1, 2002
356 N.C. 418 (N.C. 2002)

reversing this Court's decision and adopting Judge Wynn's dissent in State v. Wilkerson, 148 N.C. App. 310, 559 S.E.2d 5

Summary of this case from State v. Lofton

reversing this Court's decision and adopting Judge Wynn's dissent in State v. Wilkerson, 148 N.C. App. 310, 559 S.E.2d 5

Summary of this case from State v. Renfro

reversing opinion of Court of Appeals based upon the reasons stated in the dissent

Summary of this case from State v. Edwards

reversing State v. Wilkerson, 148 N.C. App. 310, 559 S.E.2d 5 for the reasons stated in the dissent

Summary of this case from State v. Brown

reversing this Court's decision and adopting Judge Wynn's dissent in State v. Wilkerson, 148 N.C. App. 310, 559 S.E.2d 5

Summary of this case from State v. Hairston

In Wilkerson, we adopted the dissenting opinion of the Court of Appeals, which concluded that evidence of the defendant's prior convictions was inadmissible where the state had also introduced evidence of the underlying facts and circumstances of the convictions.

Summary of this case from State v. Badgett

In State v. Wilkerson, 356 N.C. 418, 571 S.E.2d 583, rev'g 148 N.C.App. 310, 559 S.E.2d 5 (2002) (per curiam), our Supreme Court adopted Judge Wynn's dissent in the Court of Appeals opinion and established that certified copies of prior convictions were not admissible under Rule 404(b).

Summary of this case from State v. Jacobs

In Wilkerson, the jury convicted defendant of possession with intent to sell or deliver cocaine and trafficking in cocaine.

Summary of this case from State v. Bailey

In Wilkerson, the North Carolina Supreme Court reversed this Court's decision, 148 N.C. App. 310, 559 S.E.2d 5 (2002), per curiam for the reasons stated in Judge Wynn's dissent, which opined that the bare fact of a prior conviction, elicited from the clerk of court only for the purpose of showing intent under Rule 404(b), is irrelevant and should be excluded by Rule 402.

Summary of this case from State v. Cherry

In Wilkerson, the other crimes evidence presented by the detectives, and introduced for the limited purpose of showing the defendant's knowledge and intent to sell cocaine, was admissible (assuming it met the 403 balancing test) whether or not the defendant testified.

Summary of this case from State v. Renfro

In Wilkerson, two officers testified to the facts and circumstances surrounding prior offenses committed by the defendant and a deputy clerk testified regarding the bare facts of the defendant's prior convictions arising out of those offenses.

Summary of this case from State v. Renfro

In Wilkerson, "testimony [from two law enforcement officers] concerning defendant's prior crimes... was admitted under Rule 404(b) to show defendant's intent and knowledge with respect to the charged drug offenses."

Summary of this case from State v. McCoy

In Wilkerson, the Deputy Clerk of Court testified that the defendant had prior convictions on file for possession of cocaine and sale or delivery of cocaine, and two law enforcement officers testified to the circumstances of these prior crimes.

Summary of this case from State v. Edwards

In Wilkerson, the State had the Deputy Clerk of the Superior Court take the stand and read into the record a list of the prior convictions of the defendant that were on file.

Summary of this case from State v. Brown
Case details for

State v. Wilkerson

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. RONNIE HAYZE WILKERSON

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Nov 1, 2002

Citations

356 N.C. 418 (N.C. 2002)
571 S.E.2d 583

Citing Cases

State v. Mewborn

able inferences arising from them, and defendant's testimony on cross-examination that his 1995 conviction…

State v. Maready

State v.Najewicz, 112 N.C.App. 280, 294, 436 S.E.2d 132, 141 (1993) , disc. review denied, 335 N.C. 563, 441…

28 Citing Cases