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 this first-degree murder case, the defendant challenged (1) the validity of a search warrant for his home; (2) the trial court’s refusal to suppress electronic monitoring data from a GPS unit the defendant was wearing at the time of the offense; (3) the trial court’s refusal to allow...
In this New Hanover County case, the Supreme Court per curiam vacated and remanded an unpublished Court of Appeals opinion that reversed defendant’s conviction for trafficking by possession of an opiate. The Court of Appeals majority ruled that the trial court abused its discretion by ruling...
The defendant was convicted at trial of indecent liberties with a minor in Pitt County. The trial court allowed an expert witness for the State to testify the minor child had been sexually abused, despite a lack of physical evidence. The defendant did not object at the time. The same expert...
The defendant was convicted by a jury of two counts of statutory sexual offense with a child by an adult and one count of first-degree kidnapping based on his repeated sexual assaults of his seven-year-old niece. The trial court sentenced the defendant to prison and ordered him to enroll in...
In this child sexual assault case, the court reversed the trial court’s order denying the defendant’s Motion for Appropriate Relief (MAR) seeking a new trial for ineffective assistance of counsel related to opinion testimony by the State’s expert. The defendant was convicted of sexual offenses...
Reversing the Court of Appeals, the court held that Evidence Rule 702(a1) does not require the trial court to explicitly recognize a law enforcement officer as an expert witness pursuant to Rule 702(a) before he can testify to the results of a HGN test. Rather, the court noted, prior...
Reversing the Court of Appeals, the court held that Evidence Rule 702(a1) does not require the trial court to explicitly recognize a law enforcement officer as an expert witness pursuant to Rule 702(a) before he can testify to the results of a HGN test. Rather, the court noted, prior...
Reversing the Court of Appeals in a case in which the amended version of Rule 702 applied, the Supreme Court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding defense expert testimony regarding repressed memory and the suggestibility of memory. The case involved a number of...
Reversing the Court of Appeals in a case in which the amended version of Rule 702 applied, the Supreme Court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding defense expert testimony regarding repressed memory and the suggestibility of memory. The case involved a number of...
Affirming the decision below, the court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by ruling that the defendant’s proffered expert testimony did not meet the standard for admissibility under Rule 702(a). The defendant offered its expert to testify on three principal topics: that,...
Affirming the decision below, the court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by ruling that the defendant’s proffered expert testimony did not meet the standard for admissibility under Rule 702(a). The defendant offered its expert to testify on three principal topics: that,...
The court modified and affirmed State v. Towe, 210 N.C. App. 430 (Mar. 15, 2011). The court of appeals held that the trial court committed plain error by allowing the State’s medical expert to testify that the child victim was sexually abused when no physical findings supported this...
Affirming State v. King, 214 N.C. App. 114 (Aug. 2, 2011) (trial court did not abuse its discretion by excluding the State’s expert testimony regarding repressed memory under Rule 403), the court disavowed that part of the opinion below that relied on Barrett v. Hyldburg, 127 N...
The court reversed a decision by the court of appeals in State v. Nabors, 207 N.C. App. 463 (Oct. 19, 2010) (the trial court erred by denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss drug charges when the evidence that the substance at issue was crack cocaine consisted of lay opinion testimony...
The trial court properly sustained the State’s objection to the defendant’s attempt to introduce opinion testimony regarding his IQ from a special education teacher who met the defendant when he was eleven years old. Because the witness had not been tendered as an expert, her speculation as to...
In a drug case, the trial court abused its discretion by allowing the State’s expert in chemical analyses of drugs and forensic chemistry to identify the pills at issue as controlled substances when the expert’s method of making that identification consisted of a visual inspection and comparison...
In this Macon County case, defendant appealed his convictions for forcible rape, kidnapping, burglary, assault on a female, and interfering with an emergency communication, arguing error in (1) denying his motion to dismiss the kidnapping charge, (2) allowing expert testimony about a sexual...
In this New Hanover County case, defendant appealed his conviction for first-degree murder, arguing error in (1) denying his motion to dismiss for lack of evidence he was the perpetrator; (2) overruling his objection that the trial court did not make necessary findings on reliability for expert...
In this Guilford County case, defendant appealed her conviction for trafficking methamphetamine, arguing (1) plain error in admitting testimony from an expert without a sufficient foundation for reliability under Rule of Evidence 702, and (2) error in failing to intervene ex mero motu ...
In this Wake County case, defendant appealed his convictions for first-degree murder, rape, kidnapping, robbery, and associated crimes, arguing error in (1) the limitation of his cross-examination of the State’s psychiatry expert, and (2) denial of his request for a special jury instruction on...
In this Rockingham County case, defendant appealed his convictions for statutory rape, indecent liberties with a child, and sex act by a substitute parent or guardian, arguing error in admitting expert testimony that the victim’s testimony was not coached, in granting a motion in limine...
In this Mecklenburg County case, defendant appealed his convictions for breaking and entering, larceny, and attaining habitual breaking and entering offender status, arguing error in (1) the trial court’s comments about the existence of defendant’s previous convictions during the habitual...
In this Wake County case, defendant appealed his convictions for statutory rape and taking indecent liberties with a child, arguing the trial court improperly excluded testimony from his expert. The Court of Appeals dismissed defendant’s appeal.
In 2019, defendant had sex with a 15-year-...
In this Rowan County case, defendant appeals her conviction for second-degree murder, challenging the exclusion of her expert’s testimony and the admission of lay opinion testimony from the State’s witness. The Court of Appeals found no prejudicial error.
In April of 2018, defendant was...
In this Robeson County case, defendant appealed his conviction for driving while impaired, arguing the trial court erred by admitting a toxicology report without authentication and allowing the arresting officer to testify to defendant’s specific blood alcohol concentration. The Court of Appeals...
In this first-degree murder and discharging a firearm into an occupied vehicle in operation case, the Court of Appeals determined that the trial court did not commit reversible error on evidentiary issues and that there was no cumulative error. Defendant was jealous of Demesha Warren’s...
The defendant was convicted by a jury of one count of rape of a child, one count of indecent liberties with a child, and eight counts of sexual offense with a child, and he received four consecutive sentences. The defendant did not object to the testimony of the state’s expert witness at...
The defendant was found guilty of taking indecent liberties with a child after his thirteen-year-old niece disclosed to several people that the defendant was behaving in a sexually inappropriate manner toward her.
On appeal, the defendant contended that the trial court...
After the defendant’s wife left him due to his drinking and violence, the defendant committed a number of threatening and destructive acts towards her that culminated in the defendant shooting his estranged wife twice in the head outside her work. The victim survived and called 911, and...
The defendant was convicted of two counts of sexual offense with a child by an adult, rape of a child, first-degree kidnapping, and two counts of taking indecent liberties with a child in Wake County, stemming from the assault of a six-year-old child at a church.
(1) In regard to one of...
The defendant was convicted at trial of numerous sex offenses against minor children, including statutory sex offense, sexual activity by substitute parent, and sale of controlled substances to minors in Cleveland County. He was sentenced to a minimum of 600 months and ordered to enroll in...
The defendant was convicted of first-degree murder in Person County. The victim was a neighbor with whom the defendant had long-running disputes. According to the defendant, he shot the neighbor in self-defense. The victim was shot 11 or 12 times, with the vast majority of the bullets having...
(1) The defendant was convicted of possession with intent to sell or deliver a Schedule II controlled substance and sale of methamphetamine. At trial, the State presented the testimony of an expert in drug chemistry from the North Carolina State Crime Lab. She testified that she performed...
The defendant was convicted of armed robbery in Mecklenburg County and appealed. He complained that a fingerprint analyst’s expert testimony failed to show that the witness applied reliably applied the relevant methods and principles to the case, in violation of N.C. Evid. Rule 702(a)(3)....
Defendants Molly Martens Corbett (“Molly”) and Thomas Michael Martens (“Tom”), daughter and father, were convicted of second degree murder in the death of Molly’s husband, Jason Corbett (“Jason”). Evidence at trial established that Tom attempted to stop Jason from choking Molly by hitting Jason...
The defendant was convicted of statutory rape of C.C., a 13-year-old child. This was the second trial of the defendant; at the first trial involving the events of that evening, the jury acquitted him on some charges and there was a mistrial on the statutory rape charge. At the second trial, the...
In this Pasquotank County case, the defendant was convicted of first-degree murder. Upon discovering the body of the victim, police found five shell casings at the scene and two bullets on the victim’s body. At trial, an agent from the State Crime Lab was qualified as an expert in “forensics...
An anonymous person contacted law enforcement to report that a small green vehicle with license plate RCW-042 was in a specific area, had run several vehicles off the road, had struck a vehicle, and was attempting to leave the scene. Deputies went to the area and immediately stopped a vehicle...
In this sexual assault case although a nurse’s testimony was improperly admitted, the error did not rise to the level of plain error. The nurse interviewed and examined the victim. At trial the nurse testified that the victim’s exam “was consistent with someone reporting a sexual assault” solely...
In this murder case, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing two forensic pathologists to testify to expert opinions regarding the amount of blood discovered in the defendant’s house. Essentially, the experts testified that the significant amount of blood at the scene suggested...
In this second-degree rape case involving a victim who had consumed alcohol, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to allow testimony of defense expert, Dr. Wilkie Wilson, a neuropharmacologist. During voir dire, Wilson testified that one of his areas of expertise was alcohol...
In this case involving convictions of first-degree murder, attempted first-degree murder, and armed robbery, the trial court did not err by prohibiting a defense expert from testifying concerning the impact of specific leading questions asked by law enforcement officers during their interviews...
In this first-degree murder case, where the victim was found in a bathtub with a hair dryer and cause of death was an issue, the trial court did not err by admitting expert opinions.
The defendant asserted that expert Michael Kale was not qualified to offer expert testimony that a...
In this drug case, the trial court erred but did not commit plain error by allowing the State’s expert to testify that the pills were hydrocodone. With no objection from the defendant at trial, the expert testified that she performed a chemical analysis on a single tablet and found that it...
The trial court did not abuse its discretion by partially sustaining the State’s objection to expert testimony by a defense witness regarding the factors affecting the reliability of eyewitness identification. UNC-Charlotte Prof. Dr. Van Wallendael was qualified and accepted by the court as an...
In this indecent liberties with a child case, the court rejected the defendant’s argument that a nurse’s opinion testimony improperly vouched for the victim’s credibility. In the relevant portion of her testimony, the nurse stated that erythema that she observed on the victim’s privates was...
In this drug case, the trial court did not commit plain error by admitting the expert opinion of a forensic chemist. On appeal, the defendant argued that the expert’s testimony failed to demonstrate that the methods she used were reliable under the Rule 702. Specifically, he argued that the...
In this DWI case the trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting an officer’s expert testimony that the defendant was under the influence of a central nervous system depressant. On appeal the defendant argued that the State failed to lay a sufficient foundation under Rule 702 to...
In this homicide case, the trial court did not err by excluding the expert opinion testimony of a forensic psychologist about the phenomenon of “fight or flight.” Citing the North Carolina Supreme Court’s McGrady decision the court noted that the expert did not possess any medical or...
In this child sexual assault case, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing Kelli Wood, an expert in clinical social work specializing in child sexual abuse cases, to testify that it is not uncommon for children to delay disclosure of sexual abuse and to testify to possible...
The evidence was sufficient to sustain the defendant’s conviction for possession of methamphetamine. After the police discovered a white crystalline substance in a vehicle, they arrested the defendant who had been sitting in the driver’s seat of the car. While being transported to a detention...
The trial court did not err by admitting an officer’s testimony about the results of a horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN) test. At trial, the North Carolina Highway Patrol Trooper who responded to a call regarding a vehicle accident was tendered as an expert in HGN testing. The defendant objected...
(1) In this child sexual assault case, the trial court did not err by admitting an assessment in a report by the State’s medical expert, Dr. Thomas, of “Child sexual abuse.” Thomas testified to general characteristics of abused children. She did not offer an opinion that the victim had been...
Following its decision in State v. Babich, ___ N.C. App. ___, 797 S.E.2d 359 (2017), in this DWI case the court held that the State’s expert testimony regarding retrograde extrapolation was inadmissible under Daubert and Rule 702. The expert used the defendant’s .06 BAC 1 hour and 35...
The trial court did not err by allowing a state trooper to testify about the results of a chemical analysis of the defendant’s breath. On appeal, the defendant argued that the State failed to provide an adequate foundation for this testimony. Specifically, the court found that the requirements...
In this attempted murder and robbery case, the court applied the new Daubert test for expert testimony and held that trial court abused its discretion by allowing the State’s expert witness to testify that latent fingerprints found on the victim’s truck and on evidence seized during a...
The trial court did not commit plain error by allowing a trooper to testify at trial about the HGN test he administered on the defendant during the stop where the State never formally tendered the trooper as an expert under Rule 702. The court noted that during the pendency of the appeal the...
In this drug case, the court held that although the trial court erred by allowing lay opinion testimony identifying the substance at issue as crack cocaine based on a visual identification, the error was not prejudicial where the State presented expert testimony, based on a scientifically valid...
In this DWI case to which the amended version of Evidence Rule 702 applied, the court held that a trial court does not err when it admits expert testimony regarding the results of a Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) test without first determining that HGN testing is a product of reliable...
In this homicide case, the trial court did not err by allowing the State’s expert witness on automatism to testify to the defendant’s state of mind at the time of the shooting. The expert endocrinologist testified that based on his experience with hypoglycemia and his review of the defendant’s...
In this statutory rape case, the court rejected the defendant’s argument that the trial court erred by allowing the State’s witness, Dr. Rothe, to improperly bolster the victim’s credibility. Rothe made no definitive diagnosis that the victim had experienced sexual abuse. Instead, Rothe detailed...
In this drug case, the trial court committed plain error by allowing a law enforcement officer to testify that pills found at the defendant’s home were Alprazolam and Oxycodone, where the identification was based on a visual inspection of the pills and use of a website, drugs.com. Under North...
In this child sexual assault case, the State’s medical expert did not impermissibly testify that the victim had been abused. Case law holds that in the absence of physical evidence to support a diagnosis of sexual abuse, expert testimony that sexual abuse has in fact occurred is not admissible...
In this DWI case, the trial court erred by admitting retrograde extrapolation testimony by the State’s expert witness. That expert used the defendant’s 0.07 blood alcohol concentration 1 hour and 45 minutes after the traffic stop to extrapolate that the defendant had a blood alcohol...
In this DWI case, the trial court erred by denying the defendant’s motion to exclude an officer’s Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (“HGN”) testimony and allowing the officer to testify about the results of the HGN test without qualifying him as an expert under Rule 702. Citing State v. Godwin...
In this burning of a building case, the trial court did not commit plain error by allowing Investigator Gullie to offer expert opinion testimony. Investigator Gullie testified at trial without objection. Noting the procedural posture of the case, the court stated:
In...
(1) In this drug case, testimony from the State’s expert sufficiently established a trafficking amount of opium (over 4 grams). Following lab protocol, the forensic analyst grouped the pharmaceutically manufactured pills seized into four categories based on their unique physical characteristics...
In this drug case, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting expert testimony identifying the substance at issue as marijuana. At trial, Agent Baxter, a forensic scientist with the N.C. State Crime Lab, testified that she examined the substance, conducted relevant tests, and that...
Applying the Daubert standard, the court held that the trial court improperly allowed a medical examiner to testify that the victim’s death was a homicide, when that opinion was based not on medical evidence but rather on non-medical information provided to the expert by law enforcement...
Following its opinion in Godwin, above, the court held, in this DWI case, that the trial court erred by admitting lay opinion testimony on the results of an HGN test and that a new trial was required.
The defendant did not establish plain error with respect to his claim that the State’s expert vouched for the credibility of the child sexual assault victim. The expert testified regarding the victim’s bruises and opined that they were the result of blunt force trauma; when asked whether the...
In this child sexual assault case, the trial court rejected the defendant’s argument that the State’s expert witness was not qualified to give testimony under amended Rule 702. Because the defendant was indicted on April 11, 2011, the amendments to Rule 702 do not apply to his case.
In this voluntary manslaughter case, where the defendant’s pit bull attacked and killed the victim, the trial court did not commit plain error by allowing a pathologist to opine that the victim’s death was due to dog bites. The court rejected the defendant’s argument that the expert was in no...
In this conspiracy to traffic in opiates case, the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction where the State’s expert analyzed only one of the pills in question and then confirmed that the remainder were visually consistent with the one that was tested. The police seized 20 pills...
In this conspiracy to traffic in opiates case, the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction where the State’s expert analyzed only one of the pills in question and then confirmed that the remainder were visually consistent with the one that was tested. The police seized 20 pills...
(1) In this child sexual assault case the trial court did not err by admitting testimony from the victim’s therapist. The court rejected the defendant’s argument that the therapist’s testimony constituted impermissible vouching for the victim’s credibility. The therapist specialized in working...
The evidence was sufficient with respect to 35 counts of possession of the precursor chemical pseudoephedrine with intent to manufacture methamphetamine. The court rejected the defendant’s argument that the evidence was insufficient because the substance was not chemically identified as...
In this burning of personal property case, the trial court did not err by allowing the State’s expert in fire investigation, a fire marshal, to testify that the fire had been intentionally set. The court noted that in State v. Hales, 344 N.C. 419, 424-25 (1996), the North Carolina...
(1) In this DWI case, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the State’s witness, a field technician in the Forensic Test of Alcohol Branch of the NC DHHS, who demonstrated specialized knowledge, experience, and training in blood alcohol physiology, pharmacology, and related...
In this child sexual assault case, no error occurred when the State’s expert medical witness testified that the victim’s delay in reporting anal penetration was a characteristic consistent with the general behavior of children who have been sexually abused in that manner. The court rejected the...
In this child sexual abuse case, no error occurred when the medical doctor who examined the victim explained the victim’s normal examination, stating that 95% of children examined for sexual abuse have normal exams and that “it’s more of a surprise when we do find something.” The doctor further...
(1) In this opium trafficking case where the State’s witness was accepted by the trial court as an expert witness without objection from defendant and the defendant did not cross-examine the expert regarding the sufficiency of the sample size and did not make the sufficiency of the sample size a...
In this child sexual abuse case, the State’s treating medical experts did not vouch for the victim’s credibility. The court noted that defendant’s argument appears to be based primarily on the fact that the experts testified about the problems reported by the victim without qualifying each...
In this homicide case where the defendant was charged with murdering his wife, that the trial court did not err by allowing the State’s expert witness pathologists to testify that the victim’s cause of death was “homicide[.]” It concluded:
The pathologists in this case were tendered as...
(1) In this child sexual abuse case, testimony from a psychologist, Ms. Bellis, who treated the victim did not constitute expert testimony that impermissibly vouched for the victim’s credibility. Bellis testified, in part, that the victim “came in because she had been molested by her older...
In this sexual assault case, no plain error occurred when a pediatric nurse practitioner testified to the opinion that her medical findings were consistent with the victim’s allegation of sexual abuse. The nurse performed a physical examination of the victim. She testified that in girls who are...
Relying on State v. Meadows, 201 N.C. App. 707 (2010) (trial court abused its discretion by allowing an officer to testify that substances were cocaine based on NarTest field test), the court held that the trial abused its discretion by admitting an officer’s testimony that narcotics...
No error occurred when the State’s experts in a sexual assault case testified that the victim’s physical injuries were consistent with the sexual assault she described.
In this rape and murder case in which the old “Howerton” version of Rule 702 applied, the court rejected the defendant’s argument that opinion testimony by the State’s medical examiner experts as to cause of death was unreliable and should not have been admitted. The court concluded:...
In this child sex abuse case, the trial court did not err by allowing the State’s expert in pediatric medicine and the evaluation and treatment of sexual abuse to testify about common characteristics she observed in sexually abused children and a possible basis for those characteristics. The...
In a child sexual abuse case, the trial court did not err by admitting testimony by the State’s medical experts. The court rejected the defendant’s argument that an expert pediatrician improperly testified that the victim had been sexually abused, concluding that the expert gave no such...
In this murder case, the trial court committed reversible error by ruling that the defendant’s expert was not qualified to give expert testimony that incriminating computer files had been planted on the defendant’s computer. Temporary internet files recovered from the defendant’s computer showed...
In a child homicide case, the trial court did not commit plain error by allowing the State’s medical experts to testify that their review of the medical records and other available information indicated that the victim’s injuries were consistent with previously observed cases involving...
For purposes of applying the effective date of the amendment to Rule 702 (the amended rule applies to actions "arising on or after" 1 October 2011), in a case where a superseding indictment is used, the relevant date is the date the superseding indictment is filed, not the filing date of the...
In this child sex case, the trial court committed reversible error by allowing the State’s medical expert to testify to the opinion that the victim’s disclosure was consistent with sexual abuse where there was no physical evidence consistent with abuse. In order for an expert medical witness to...
In criminal cases, the amendment to N.C.Evid. R. 702, which is “effective October 1, 2011, and applies to actions commenced on or after that date” applies to cases where the indictment is filed on or after that date. The court noted that it had suggested in a footnote in a prior unpublished...
In a child sex case decided under pre-amended R. 702, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting expert opinion that the victim suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder when a licensed clinical social worker was tendered as an expert in social work and routinely made mental...
In a counterfeit controlled substance case, the trial court committed plain error by admitting evidence identifying a substance as tramadol hydrochloride based solely upon an expert’s visual inspection. The State’s witness Brian King, a forensic chemist with the State Crime Lab, testified that...
In a child sex case, the trial court did not err by allowing the State’s properly qualified medical expert to testify that the victim’s profile was consistent with that of a sexually abused child. The court rejected the defendant’s argument that the State failed to lay a proper foundation for...
The trial court erred by admitting expert testimony regarding DNA evidence that amounted to a "prosecutor's fallacy." That fallacy, the court explained, involves the use of DNA evidence to show "random match probability." Random match probability evidence, it continued, is the probability that...
(1) In a child sex case, the trial court did not err by qualifying as an expert a family therapist who provided counseling to both victims. The court first concluded that the witness possessed the necessary qualifications. Among other things, she had a master’s degree in Christian counseling and...
In a misdemeanor possession of marijuana case, the State was not required to test the substance alleged to be marijuana where the arresting officer testified without objection that based on his training the substance was marijuana. The officer’s testimony was substantial evidence that the...
In a drug case, an officer properly was allowed to identify the substance at issue as marijuana based on his “visual and olfactory assessment”; a chemical analysis of the marijuana was not required.
Improper testimony by an expert pediatrician in a child sexual abuse case required a new trial. After the alleged abuse, the child was seen by Dr. Gutman, a pediatrician, who reviewed her history and performed a physical exam. Gutman observed a deep notch in the child’s hymen, which was highly...
In a trafficking in opium case, the State’s forensic expert properly testified that the substance at issue was an opium derivative where the expert relied on a chemical analysis, not a visual identification.
Although the trial court erred by allowing the State’s expert to testify that the child victim had been sexually abused, the error did not rise to the level of plain error. Responding to a question about the child’s treatment, the expert, a licensed clinical social worker, said: "For a child,...
The trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to allow a defense witness to testify as an expert. The defense proffered a forensic scientist and criminal profiler for qualification as an expert. Because the witness’s testimony was offered to discredit the victim’s account of the...
In a case in which the defendant was convicted of trafficking in more than 400 grams of cocaine, the trial court did not err by allowing the State’s expert to testify that the substance was cocaine where the expert combined three separate bags into one bag before testing the substance. After...
The trial court did not abuse its discretion by reversing its ruling on the defendant’s motion in limine and allowing the State’s expert witnesses’ firearm identification testimony. The trial court initially had ruled that it would limit any testimony by the experts to statements that the...
In a child sexual offense case, the trial court did not err by excluding defense evidence consisting of testimony by a social worker that during therapy sessions the victim was “overly dramatic,” “manipulative,” and exhibited “attention seeking behavior.” The testimony did not relate to an...
(1) In a drug case, the court followed State v. Meadows, 201 N.C. App. 707 (2010), and held that the trial court erred by allowing an offer to testify as an expert concerning the use and reliability of a NarTest machine. (2) The trial court erred by admitting testimony by an expert in...
(1) The trial court improperly allowed an officer to testify that a substance was cocaine based on a visual examination. (2) However, that same officer was properly allowed to testify that a substance was marijuana based on visual identification. (3) In a footnote, the court indicated that the...
Because a lab that tested a controlled substance was neither licensed nor accredited, expert testimony regarding testing done at that lab on the substances at issue was inadmissible.
(1) In a drug case, no plain error occurred when the trial court allowed the State’s expert forensic chemist to testify as to the results of his chemical analysis of the substance in question. Through the expert’s testimony as to his professional background and use of established forensic...
No plain error occurred when the trial court admitted expert medical testimony identifying the victim’s death as a homicide. Medical experts described the nature of the victim’s injuries and how those injuries had resulted in his death. Their testimony did not use the word "homicide" as a legal...
In a child sexual abuse case, no plain error occurred when the trial court allowed the State’s expert to testify that the victim exhibited some classic signs of a sexually abused child. The expert did not testify that the victim was in fact sexually abused.
(1) The trial court did not abuse its discretion by qualifying the State’s witness as an expert in the fields of forensic blood alcohol physiology and pharmacology, breath and blood alcohol testing, and the effects of drugs on human performance and behavior. The witness was the head of the...
The trial judge did not commit plain error by allowing a witness accepted as an expert forensic toxicologist to testify about the effects of cocaine on the body. The defendant had argued that this testimony was outside of the witness’s area of expertise. The court concluded that “[a]s a trained...
In a case arising from a pharmacy break-in, the court rejected the defendant’s argument that the trial court erred by failing to dismiss trafficking in opium charges because the State did not present a chemical analysis of the pills. Citing State v. Ward, 364 N.C. 133 (2010), and ...
(1) In an impaired driving case, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the State’s witness to testify as an expert in pharmacology and physiology. Based on his knowledge, skill, experience, training, and education, the witness was better informed than the jury about the...
An expert in forensic chemistry properly made an in-court visual identification of marijuana. Citing State v. Fletcher, 92 N.C. App. 50, 57 (1988), but not mentioning State v. Ward, 364 N.C. 133 (June 17, 2010), the court noted that it had previously held that a police...
The trial court did not err by allowing the State’s expert in forensic computer examination to testify that individuals normally try to hide proof of their criminal activity, do not normally save incriminating computer conversations, the defendant would have had time to dispose of incriminating...
The trial court did not err by allowing the State’s expert in family medicine to testify that if there had been a tear in the victim’s hymen, it probably would have healed by the time the expert saw the victim. The testimony explained that the lack of physical findings indicative of sexual abuse...
In a murder case involving a shooting, the trial court did not commit plain error by allowing a Special Agent with the State Bureau of Investigation to testify as an expert in the field of bullet identification, when his testimony was based on sufficiently reliable methods of proof in the area...
The trial court did not err by denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss a charge of trafficking by sale or delivery in more than four grams and less than fourteen grams of Dihydrocodeinone when the State’s expert sufficiently identified the substance at issue as a controlled substance. Special...
The trial court erred when it allowed the State’s expert in clinical social work to testify that she had diagnosed the victim with sexual abuse when there was no physical evidence consistent with abuse. However, the error did not constitute plain error given other evidence in the case.
The trial court committed reversible error by allowing the State’s expert to use “odor analysis” as a baseline for his opinion as to the defendant’s blood-alcohol level (BAC) at the time of the accident, formed using retrograde extrapolation. When the defendant reported to the police department...
In a child sexual abuse case, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by overruling a defense objection to a response by the State’s expert. On direct examination, the expert testified that the child’s physical examination revealed no signs of trauma to the hymen. On cross-examination, she...
The trial court erred by denying the defendant’s motion to strike a response by the State’s expert witness in a child sexual abuse case. During cross-examination, defense counsel asked whether the victim told the expert that she had been penetrated. The expert responded: “She described the...
In a case in which the defendant was found guilty of felonious child abuse inflicting serious bodily injury and first-degree murder, the trial court did not err by admitting testimony of the State’s expert in the field of developmental and forensic pediatrics. Based on a review of photographs,...
Holding that the trial court committed plain error by admitting the testimony of the State’s expert chemist witness that the substance at issue was hydrocodone, an opium derivative. The State’s expert used a Micromedics database of pharmaceutical preparations to identify the pills at issue...
In a DWI/homicide case, the trial court erred by allowing a state’s witness to testify about ingredients and effect of Narcan. Although the state proffered the testimony as lay opinion, it was actually expert testimony. When the state called the witness, it elicited extensive testimony regarding...
A new trial was required in a drug case where the trial court erred by admitting expert testimony as to the identity of the controlled substance when that testimony was based on the results of a NarTest machine. Applying ...
Prejudicial error occurred warranting a new trial when the trial court overruled an objection to testimony of a witness who was qualified as an expert in the treatment of sexually abused children. After recounting a detailed description of an alleged sexual assault provided to her by the victim...
A laboratory technician who testified that substances found by law enforcement officers contained cocaine was properly qualified as an expert even though she did not possess an advanced degree.
The trial court did not err in admitting the State’s expert witness’s testimony that the results of his examination of the victim were consistent with a child who had been sexually abused; the expert did not testify that abuse had in fact occurred and did not comment on the victim’s credibility...
The state’s expert pediatrician was improperly allowed to testify that his findings were consistent with a history of anal penetration received from the child victim where no physical evidence supported the diagnosis. The expert was properly allowed to testify that victim’s history of vaginal...
In child sexual abuse case, it was error to allow the state’s expert, a child psychologist, to testify that he believed that the victim had been exposed to sexual abuse. The expert’s statement pertained to the victim’s credibility; it apparently was unsupported by clinical evidence.
Rule 702(a1) obviates the state’s need to prove that the horizontal gaze nystagmus testing method is sufficiently reliable.