State v. Mills, COA23-1097, ___ N.C. App. ___ (Oct. 15, 2024)

In this Rowan County case, defendant appealed after being convicted of robbery with a dangerous weapon and possession of a firearm by a felon, arguing the trial court improperly considered his choice to have a jury trial in sentencing. The Court of Appeals found no error.

Defendant’s matter came to trial in August of 2021; on the day the matter was called, defendant failed to appear, and the trial court set defendant’s bond at $1 million, noting that defendant had reached his “reckoning day.” Slip Op. at 2. After the jury returned verdicts of guilty, the trial court addressed defendant during sentencing regarding his right to a jury trial: “the law also allows me in my sentencing discretion to consider a lesser sentence for people who step forward and take responsibility for their actions. By exercising your right to a jury trial[,] you never ever did that.” Id. at 3-4. Defendant received sentences within the presumptive range.

Considering defendant’s argument, the Court of Appeals agreed with the State’s position that “the trial court’s statements were an accurate reflection of the law.” Id. at 4. The court noted that the pretrial remarks were the result of frustration that the defendant did not appear, and as for the remarks at sentencing, “the [trial] court did not suggest, much less explicitly state, that it was imposing a harsher sentence because Defendant invoked his right to a jury trial.” Id.at 10. Because the trial court’s comments were permissible, defendant could not demonstrate that he was punished for exercising his right to a jury trial.