Smith's Criminal Case Compendium
Smith's Criminal Case Compendium
Table of Contents
Smith's Criminal Case Compendium
About
This compendium includes significant criminal cases by the U.S. Supreme Court & N.C. appellate courts, Nov. 2008 – Present. Selected 4th Circuit cases also are included.
Jessica Smith prepared case summaries Nov. 2008-June 4, 2019; later summaries are prepared by other School staff.
Instructions
Navigate using the table of contents to the left or by using the search box below. Use quotations for an exact phrase search. A search for multiple terms without quotations functions as an “or” search. Not sure where to start? The 5 minute video tutorial offers a guided tour of main features – Launch Tutorial (opens in new tab).
In a case with multiple victims, the court rejected the defendant’s argument that the State’s evidence was too vague for the jury to infer that he pointed the gun at any particular individual. One witness testified that upon defendant’s orders, “everybody ran in the room with us … and he was waiving [sic] the gun at us[.]” Another testified that “[w]hen [defendant] came down the hall, when he told everyone to get into one room, all of them came in there … [e]ven the two little ones ….” She further testified, “I was nervous for the kids was down there hollering and carrying on, and he hollered – he point [sic] the gun toward everybody in one room. One room. And told them come on in here with me.” A third testified that once everybody was in the same bedroom, defendant pointed the shotgun outward from his shoulder.
The evidence was insufficient to support an adjudication of delinquency based on assault by pointing a gun where the weapon was an airsoft gun from which plastic pellets were fired using a “pump action” mechanism. For purposes of the assault by pointing a gun statute, the term “gun” “encompasses devices ordinarily understood to be ‘firearms’ and not other devices that fall outside that category.” Slip op. at 12. Thus, imitation firearms are not covered. The court noted that its conclusion had no bearing on whether the juvenile might be found delinquent for assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury, assault with a deadly weapon, assault inflicting serious injury, or assault on a child under twelve.