STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
v. Buncombe County
No. 01 CRS 58200
01 CRS 6383
THOMAS MILTON HACKLER
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General
Douglas W. Corkhill, for the State.
Robert W. Ewing for defendant-appellant.
MARTIN, Judge.
Defendant was found guilty of felonious breaking or entering
and felonious larceny. He pled guilty to habitual felon status.
The court consolidated the convictions for judgment and sentenced
defendant to a minimum term of 80 months and a maximum term of 105
months.
The State presented evidence tending to show that Lloyd
Goehring Hensley died 19 April 2001; his sister, Julia Ann Hawkins,
was appointed administrator of his estate. On 7 July 2001, Ms.
Hawkins discovered that a lawn mower was missing from an
outbuilding of Mr. Hensley's unoccupied residence located at 399
Emma Road in Asheville. She had not given anybody permission to
take the mower. Ms. Hawkins reported the matter to law enforcementofficers.
On 6 July 2001 Deputy John Joseph Miller, III, of the Buncombe
County Sheriff's Department was called to investigate a complaint
that a person was living at 12 Goodwill Street in Asheville without
the homeowner's permission. Defendant and the homeowner were
present at the residence. Among other things, defendant was in
possession of a lawn mower defendant stated he had taken from up
the road. The following day, Deputy Miller was dispatched to
investigate Ms. Hawkins' complaint concerning the lawn mower
missing from her deceased brother's residence. Deputy Miller
examined the outbuilding and observed that the lock had been
broken. Defendant confessed to Deputy Miller that he had taken the
lawn mower from the outbuilding.
Defendant first contends the court erred by denying his motion
to dismiss the charge of felonious larceny because the indictment
is fatally defective. The indictment charged that the purloined
lawn mower was the personal property of The Estate of Lloyd
Goehring Hensley. In State v. Jessup, 279 N.C. 108, 111, 181
S.E.2d 594, 596 (1971), the indictment charged the defendant with
larceny of personal property of the estate of W.M. Jessup,
deceased . . . . The Supreme Court held that the indictment was
fatally defective because it failed to allege ownership of the
property in an entity capable of possessing or holding title to
personal property. Id. at 114, 181 S.E.2d at 598. Based upon the
precedent established in Jessup, this Court held in State v.
Linney, 138 N.C. App. 169, 173, 531 S.E.2d 245, 250, disc. reviewdismissed and appeal dismissed, 352 N.C. 595, 545 S.E.2d 214
(2000), that an indictment charging the defendant with embezzling
money belonging to the estate of Georgiana Alexander was fatally
defective. The State concedes that these cases are
indistinguishable and that defendant's conviction of felonious
larceny must be vacated.
Defendant's remaining contention is that the court erred by
denying his motion to dismiss the charge of felonious breaking and
entering. He argues the evidence fails to show that the breaking
or entering of the building was without the owner's consent.
A motion to dismiss requires the court to determine whether
the State has presented substantial evidence of each element of the
offense charged and to identify the defendant as the perpetrator.
State v. Earnhardt, 307 N.C. 62, 65-66, 296 S.E.2d 649, 651-52
(1982). Substantial evidence is that which a reasonable mind might
accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Id. at 66, 296 S.E.2d
at 652. The court must consider the evidence in the light most
favorable to the State, giving it the benefit of every reasonable
inference that may be drawn. Id. at 67, 296 S.E.2d at 652-53.
A person is guilty of felonious breaking and entering in
violation of G.S. § 14-54(a) if he unlawfully, without consent of
the owner or one empowered to give effective consent, breaks or
enters any building with the intent to commit a felony or larceny
therein. State v. Locklear, 320 N.C. 754, 758, 360 S.E.2d 682, 684
(1987). Viewed in the light most favorable to the State, the
evidence shows that Ms. Hawkins was responsible for her deceasedbrother's property. She posted no trespassing signs on the
property. She testified that she did not give defendant her
consent to enter the outbuilding and to take the lawn mower.
Defendant himself testified that he entered the outbuilding without
anyone's consent and took the lawn mower. Based upon the foregoing
evidence, a jury could find defendant guilty of the offense.
Felonious Larceny: Vacated.
Felonious Breaking or Entering: No error; remanded for
resentencing.
Judges McCULLOUGH and CALABRIA concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***