STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
v. Union County
Nos. 00 CRS 11363, 11365,
STEVEN LAMAR LEAK 52988
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Special Deputy Attorney
General Robert O. Crawford, III, for the State.
Haakon Thorsen for defendant-appellant.
EAGLES, Chief Judge.
A jury found defendant guilty of assault with a deadly weapon,
robbery with a dangerous weapon, and possession of a firearm as a
convicted felon. In a separate proceeding, the jury found
defendant to be an habitual felon. The trial court sentenced
defendant as an habitual felon to consecutive prison terms of 133
to 169 months for possession of a firearm and robbery with a
dangerous weapon. It imposed a concurrent 120-day sentence for the
misdemeanor assault. Defendant gave notice of appeal in open
court.
The State's evidence tended to show that defendant and two
other men approached Prime Leon Jones on Green Street in Monroe onthe early morning of 18 July 2000. Defendant asked to borrow
Jones' cigarette lighter. After using the lighter, he asked Jones
if he was carrying any money. Defendant then drew a dark-colored
pistol from beneath his shirt, pointed it at Jones and told him to
give it up. When Jones asked why he was doing this, defendant
fired the gun past Jones' head and stole his wallet, jewelry and
house keys. Defendant and his two associates then began removing
Jones' clothing but ran away when Monroe Police Officer Norman
Smith arrived in his patrol car. Jones told Smith he had been
robbed at gunpoint by three men, whom he identified by name, and
claimed that defendant had fired the gun by his head. Smith made
radio contact with Officer David McCallister, who apprehended
defendant outside of a nearby apartment building on Maurice Street.
McCallister searched defendant and recovered Jones' jewelry,
wallet, money, and keys. No gun was found. However, police
discovered one impression that is consistent with what a small
caliber firearm would leave on a cement curb in the area of the
robbery.
Defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying his
motion to dismiss, absent substantial evidence that he possessed or
used a handgun during the robbery. We disagree. A motion to
dismiss is properly denied if the evidence, viewed in the light
most favorable to the State, is sufficient to permit a reasonable
jury to find defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. See State
v. Earnhardt, 307 N.C. 62, 296 S.E.2d 649 (1982). Here, Jones'
testimony, as corroborated by his statement to Officer Smithimmediately after the robbery, was sufficient to support a finding
that defendant brandished and fired a handgun. See State v.
Roddey, 110 N.C. App. 810, 813, 431 S.E.2d 245, 248 (1993). The
fact that no [gun] was found does not automatically preclude the
existence of substantial evidence, it only means that the
credibility of Mr. [Jones] was at a premium in establishing the
existence of substantial evidence. Id. Jones' credibility as a
witness was a question of fact for the jury. Id. at 814, 431
S.E.2d at 248.
Defendant also claims that the trial court erred in convicting
and sentencing him as an habitual felon, because his instant
offenses were committed before he attained habitual felon status.
He shows that his indictment for habitual felon status alleges
three prior felony convictions on 26 May 1993, 30 January 1996, and
7 August 2000. Defendant notes his instant offenses were committed
in July 2000, prior to the third predicate felony conviction listed
in the indictment. The State concedes error on this issue.
Our statutes define an habitual felon as "[a]ny person who
has been convicted of or pled guilty to three felony offenses in
any federal court or state court in the United States or
combination thereof[.] N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-7.1 (2001). A
defendant becomes an habitual felon when he is convicted of the
third qualifying felony. State v. Brown, 146 N.C. App. 590, 593,
553 S.E.2d 428, 430 (2001). Only a defendant who commits a felony
after he has qualified as an habitual felon is subject to the
sentencing enhancement provision of the Habitual Felon Act. Id. at592, 553 S.E.2d at 430; see also N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-7.6 (2001)
(authorizing enhanced sentence "[w]hen an habitual felon as defined
in this Article commits any felony under the laws of the State of
North Carolina[.]); State v. Allen, 292 N.C. 431, 435, 233 S.E.2d
585, 588 (1977) (noting the effect of the Act is to enhance the
punishment which would otherwise be appropriate for the substantive
felony which [the defendant] has allegedly committed while in such
a status).
Under the facts alleged in the habitual felon indictment,
defendant became an habitual felon on 7 August 2000, the date of
his conviction for felony possession of cocaine. Defendant
committed his instant felonies of robbery with a dangerous weapon
and possession of a handgun as a convicted felon on 18 July 2000,
before he attained habitual felon status. On its face, the
habitual felon indictment filed will not support a finding that
defendant committed the offenses of robbery with a dangerous weapon
and possession of a firearm while having habitual felon status. We
must therefore arrest judgment as to defendant's habitual felon
status and remand to the trial court for re-sentencing on
defendant's substantive offenses. Cf. See State v. McNair, 146
N.C. App. 674, 684, 554 S.E.2d 665, 672 (2001) (citing State v.
Wilson, 128 N.C. App. 688, 691, 497 S.E.2d 416, 419 (1998)).
The record on appeal contains an additional assignment of
error not addressed by defendant in his brief to this Court. By
rule, we deem it abandoned. See N.C.R. App. P. 28(b)(6). No error as to defendant's convictions in possession of a
firearm by a felon and robbery with a dangerous weapon; judgment
arrested as to habitual felon status; remanded for re-sentencing.
Judges McCULLOUGH and HUDSON concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***