A Nice Knock-Down Argument: Statutory Construction in Jenkins and Hardaway.

Under G.S. 14-34.10, it is a felony for any person to discharge a firearm within any occupied enclosure, such as a motor vehicle, with the intent to incite fear in another. G.S. 14-34.10. In State v. Jenkins, No. COA24-889 (N.C. Ct. App. Aug. 6, 2025), the Court of Appeals held that the plain language of this statute was satisfied by a defendant who fired a gun from inside his car, injuring a victim in another car. More recently, in State v. Hardaway, No. COA24-538 (N.C. Ct. App. Oct. 1, 2025), the Court of Appeals, over a doubtful concurrence, found itself bound by Jenkins. This post considers the statutory construction of G.S. 14-34.10 in Jenkins and Hardaway. Statutory Construction A brief review of the general rules is in order. The overriding objective of statutory interpretation is to ascertain legislative intent. The intent of the legislature may be found first from the statute’s plain language. State v. Langley, 371 N.C. 389, 395 (2018). If the statutory language is clear and unambiguous, the court will give effect to the plain meaning of the words without resort to judicial construction. State v. Fields, 374 N.C. 629, 633 (2020). The court may consult a dictionary to determine the plain meaning of statutory terms. State v. Fletcher, 370 N.C. 313, 326 (2017). The door to judicial construction is opened by absurdity or ambiguity. When a literal interpretation of the statute will lead to absurd results, the reason and purpose of the law will control. State v. McLymore, [...]