State v. Brice: Pleading Rules for Habitual Offenses Are Not Jurisdictional

The court of appeals last year vacated Sandra Brice’s conviction for habitual misdemeanor larceny for stealing five packs of steaks valued at $70 from a Food Lion in Hickory. The reason? The indictment alleged the steak theft and Brice’s four prior convictions for misdemeanor larceny in a single count. That violated a statutory rule requiring that prior convictions be alleged in a separate count, and, in the court of appeals’ view, deprived the superior court of jurisdiction to enter judgment against Brice for habitual misdemeanor larceny, a felony offense. Earlier this month, the North Carolina Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals and remanded the case for reinstatement of the trial court’s judgment. Read on to find out why. First, the court of appeals. The court of appeals panel that unanimously reversed Brice’s conviction viewed its earlier decision in State v. Williams, 153 N.C. App. 192 (2002), as controlling. Williams held that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to sentence the defendant for habitual misdemeanor assault based on an indictment that alleged misdemeanor assault on a female and the existence of two or more prior assault convictions but failed to specifically allege the felony of habitual misdemeanor assault. Then discretionary review. Following the court of appeals’ decision in Brice, the State sought discretionary review before the supreme court, arguing that bills of indictment should not be vitiated for technicalities that do not affect the merits of the case. Moreover, the State argued that if noncompliance with G.S. 15A-928 was indeed a jurisdictional [...]