STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
v. Mecklenburg County
No. 01 CRS 43652
LAWRENCE ALEXANDER
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General
Martin T. McCracken, for the State.
James L. Goldsmith for defendant-appellant.
WYNN, Judge.
Defendant, Lawrence Alexander, presents the following issue
for our consideration: Whether the trial court erroneously denied
his motion to dismiss the charge of communicating threats for want
of sufficient evidence. We conclude no error was committed in the
proceedings below.
Viewed in the light most favorable to the State, the evidence
at trial tended to show that Defendant repeatedly telephoned his
ex-wife, Latrice Alexander, on 4 October 2001, leaving a message
that they “needed to talk.” When Ms. Alexander returned
Defendant's call, he forbade her to have further contact with his
mother. Ms. Alexander replied that she would continue to callDefendant's mother because she was the grandmother of Ms.
Alexander's daughter. In response, Defendant “started screaming
and cussing” and told Ms. Alexander “that he was going to blow
[her] mother f_-king head off.” After contacting her fiancé, Ms.
Alexander went to the police and to a magistrate, who issued a
warrant for Defendant's arrest. Ms. Alexander believed Defendant
would make good on his threat, based on his history of assaultive
behavior toward her. Three months into her pregnancy with her
daughter, Defendant beat Ms. Alexander into unconsciousness.
Moreover, Defendant had kept a nine millimeter rifle in their
residence throughout the marriage, despite being denied a gun
permit. On one occasion, Defendant waved the gun in front of Ms.
Alexander and her children, saying he was “just going to end it
all.” When Ms. Alexander and the children fled the house,
Defendant “hid up under the stairs waiting on [her] to return.” In
another incident when Ms. Alexander was attempting to leave,
Defendant fired the gun inside their house to make her think he had
committed suicide.
After the jury convicted Defendant of communicating threats,
a Class 1 misdemeanor, on 21 May 2003, he received a suspended
sentence of 45 days conditioned upon supervised probation of 24
months. Additionally, Defendant was ordered to serve an active
term of 10 days in the county jail as a special condition of
probation. Defendant appeals.
____________________________________________________
In his sole argument on appeal, Defendant contends the trialcourt erred in denying his motion to dismiss the charge for want of
sufficient evidence. To review the trial court's ruling, we must
determine whether the State adduced “substantial evidence” of each
essential element of the offense such that a reasonable juror could
find defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Lynch,
327 N.C. 210, 215, 393 S.E.2d 811, 814 (1990). As defined by N.C.
Gen. Stat. § 14-277.1, the elements of the crime of communicating
threats are as follows:
(1) [The defendant] willfully threatens to
physically injure the person . . .;
(2) The threat is communicated to the other
person, orally, in writing, or by any other
means;
(3) The threat is made in a manner and under
circumstances which would cause a reasonable
person to believe that the threat is likely to
be carried out; and
(4) The person threatened believes that the
threat will be carried out.
State v. Love, 156 N.C. App. 309, 316, 576 S.E.2d 709, 713 (2003).
Defendant concedes the sufficiency of the evidence that he
threatened Ms. Alexander with physical injury, that he communicated
this threat to her, and that she believed he would carry out the
threat. He asserts, however, that the State adduced no
“substantial evidence that the threat was made in such a manner and
under such circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to
conclude that the threat would likely be carried out.” We
disagree. The degree of Defendant's hostility on the telephone,
his ownership of a gun, his previous acts of violence toward Ms.
Alexander, and his past willingness to employ the gun in thecontext of their disputes are circumstances sufficient to allow
reasonable belief that he was likely to make good on his threat.
See State v. Elledge, 80 N.C. App. 714, 715, 343 S.E.2d 549, 550
(1986)(finding no error pursuant to Rule 404(b) in admitting
evidence of prior assaults in a prosecution for communicating
threats under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-277.1). Accordingly, we find
no error below.
No error.
Judges HUNTER and McCULLOUGH concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***