Smith's Criminal Case Compendium

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).

E.g., 04/27/2024
E.g., 04/27/2024
State v. Garcell, 363 N.C. 10 (Mar. 20, 2009)

The defendant was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. Notwithstanding Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005) (Eighth Amendment prohibits execution of one who commits murder before eighteenth birthday), prior violent felonies committed when the defendant was only 16 years old could be considered with respect to the G.S. 15A-2000(e)(3) (prior violent felony conviction) aggravating circumstance.

State v. Maness, 363 N.C. 261 (June 18, 2009)

The trial court did not commit plain error by submitting both the (e)(4) (murder committed to prevent arrest or effect escape) and (e)(8) (crime committed against law enforcement officer) aggravating circumstances. The (e)(4) aggravating circumstance focuses on the defendant’s subjective motivation for his or her actions while the (e)(8) aggravating circumstance pertains to the underlying factual basis of the crime. The court rejected the defendant’s argument that the aggravating circumstances impermissibly overlapped because the defendant’s motive for killing the officer was to avoid the very arrest that the officer was attempting to carry out at the time of the killing.

State v. Maness, 363 N.C. 261 (June 18, 2009)

The trial court did not commit plain error by submitting both the (e)(4) (murder committed to prevent arrest or effect escape) and (e)(8) (crime committed against law enforcement officer) aggravating circumstances. The (e)(4) aggravating circumstance focuses on the defendant’s subjective motivation for his or her actions while the (e)(8) aggravating circumstance pertains to the underlying factual basis of the crime. The court rejected the defendant’s argument that the aggravating circumstances impermissibly overlapped because the defendant’s motive for killing the officer was to avoid the very arrest that the officer was attempting to carry out at the time of the killing.

Show Table of Contents