An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Proced
ure.
NO. COA03-1096
NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS
Filed: 15 June 2004
IN THE MATTER OF P.B. Caldwell County
No. 02 J 64 &nbs
p;
Appeal by respondent from juvenile adjudication and
disposition orders entered 5 May 2003 by Judge Robert M. Brady in
Caldwell County District Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 24
May 2004.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General
Caroline Farmer, for the State.
Mercedes O. Chut for respondent-appellant.
MARTIN, Chief Judge.
Respondent appeals from an order adjudicating him delinquent
based upon findings that he committed assault inflicting serious
injury in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-32.4. On 9 May 2002,
a juvenile petition was issued alleging that P.B. willfully and
feloniously assaulted another juvenile, J.W., inflicting serious
bodily injury. The case was heard at a juvenile hearing on 30
April 2003 with respondent, his grandmother and his attorney
present.
The State's evidence tended to show that on 29 April 2002,
P.B., age twelve, his friend J.W., age ten and J.W.'s brother D.W.,
age twelve, had been playing with their Pokemon cards at P.B.'s
house. At some point, the three boys went to J.W.'s house andtold his mother that J.W. had been shot in the eye with a BB gun.
The boys told J.W.'s mother that someone shot J.W. while walking by
the house. J.W. was transported by ambulance to Caldwell Memorial
Hospital where he told Officer Trice that two boys on bicycles rode
by the house and shot him with a BB gun.
When Officer Trice talked with P.B., he told the officer that
the boys were in the backyard shooting a BB gun when J.W. walked in
front of the gun. Officer Trice then questioned J.W. again, and
this time J.W. told him that the boys were shooting at cans in the
backyard when one BB ricocheted off the can, hitting him in the
eye. Later in the evening, before being transferred to Baptist
Hospital, J.W. told his mother that P.B. actually shot him.
J.W. testified that after he and D.W. ran in and out of the
house several times, P.B. locked them out. J.W. wanted to retrieve
his Pokemon cards so he stood on a chair outside P.B.'s window and
tried to climb inside. While standing on the chair at the window,
P.B. shot him in the eye with a BB gun. J.W. testified he had not
told the truth previously because P.B., afraid of getting in
trouble, had asked him not to tell and also because he did not want
P.B. to get in trouble. D.W.'s testimony corroborated J.W.'s
account of the incident. As a result of the shooting, J.W. lost
sight in his right eye.
At the close of the State's evidence, the trial court denied
respondent's motion to dismiss. Respondent's only evidence was the
recording of an earlier hearing where J.W. and D.W. testified. At
the close of all of the evidence respondent moved to dismiss thepetition due to insufficiency of the evidence. The trial court
denied the motion. The juvenile court found that P.B. had committed
an assault inflicting serious injury; he was adjudicated delinquent
and sentenced to twelve months probation. Respondent appeals.
I.
Respondent argues the trial court erred in failing to dismiss
the petition at the close of the evidence due to insufficiency of
the evidence to support a conviction. In ruling on a motion to
dismiss, the trial court must consider all the evidence admitted
in the light most favorable to the State and decide whether there
is substantial evidence of each element of the offense charged and
that the defendant committed it. State v. McLaurin, 320 N.C. 143,
146, 357 S.E.2d 636, 638 (1987). Substantial evidence may be
direct or circumstantial, State v. Butler, 356 N.C. 141, 145, 567
S.E.2d 137, 140 (2002), but it must be such relevant evidence as
a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a
conclusion. McLaurin at 146, 357 S.E.2d at 638. In reviewing a
challenge to the sufficiency of evidence, it is not our duty to
weigh the evidence, but to determine whether there was substantial
evidence to support the adjudication. In re Heil, 145 N.C. App.
24, 29, 550 S.E.2d 815, 819 (2001).
Respondent first contends the State did not produce sufficient
evidence to support a conclusion that respondent intentionally
committed the assault. Assault inflicting serious bodily injury in
violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-32.4 requires proof of twoelements: (1) an intentional assault on another person (2)
resulting in serious bodily injury. State v. Williams, 154 N.C.
App. 176, 180, 571 S.E.2d 619, 622 (2002). Our Supreme Court
defined assault as an overt act or an attempt, or the unequivocal
appearance of an attempt, with force and violence, to do some
immediate physical injury to the person of another, which show of
force or menace of violence must be sufficient to put a person of
reasonable firmness in fear of immediate bodily harm. State v.
Roberts, 270 N.C. 655, 658, 155 S.E.2d 303, 305 (1967).
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State,
there is substantial evidence that P.B. intentionally shot J.W.
J.W. testified that the shooting was not an accident. He also
testified that after he climbed up to the window he saw P.B.
holding the gun and then saw him cock it. In addition, D.W. told
Detective Rawls that P.B. and J.W. argued because J.W. and D.W were
running in and out of the house. D.W then heard P.B. say he was
going to get his gun. P.B. admitted to Detective Rawls that after
he argued with J.W. and D.W. he went to get his gun. However, he
first told Detective Rawls he was going to shoot out the window at
some cans in the yard but later claimed he accidently shot J.W.
when he popped up at the window.
The trial court is not required 'to determine that the
evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence,' as the
test is whether the State has 'offered substantial evidence of each
element of the charged offenses sufficient to convince a rational
trier of fact beyond a reasonable doubt of defendant's guilt.' Inre Lucas, 94 N.C. App. 442, 452-453, 380 S.E.2d 563, 569 (1989)
(internal quotations omitted). Although the evidence is
conflicting, the State offered substantial evidence that P.B.
intentionally assaulted J.W. by pointing the gun and shooting at
J.W.
Defendant also argues the State did not produce substantial
evidence of serious bodily injury. 'Serious bodily injury' is
defined as bodily injury that creates a substantial risk of death,
or that causes serious permanent disfigurement, coma, a permanent
or protracted condition that causes extreme pain, or permanent or
protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member
or organ, or that results in prolonged hospitalization. N.C. Gen.
Stat. § 14-32.4 (2003).
J.W. testified that he lost sight in his right eye in the
shooting. Dr. Martin Balts, chief of emergency medicine at
Caldwell Memorial Hospital, testified that when he examined J.W. he
found an entrance wound in the iris, vitreous fluid protruding from
the eye and blood in the interior chamber of the eye. X-rays
showed a circular metallic object the size of a BB imbedded in
J.W.'s eye. After his transfer, J.W. was hospitalized for two
nights at Baptist Hospital. We hold the State produced substantial
evidence of the element of serious bodily injury. Therefore, the
trial court properly denied defendant's motion to dismiss.
II.
Next, defendant contends that the trial court erred in failing
to dismiss the charges against defendant due to flaws in thejuvenile petition. [A] petition in a juvenile action serves
essentially the same function as an indictment in a felony
prosecution and is subject to the same requirement that it aver
every element of a criminal offense, with sufficient specificity
that the accused is clearly apprised of the conduct for which he is
being charged.
In re Griffin, ___ N.C. App. ___, 592 S.E.2d 12,
16 (2004);
see N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1802 (2003)
. A criminal
charge is constitutionally sufficient if it apprises the defendant
of the charge against him with enough certainty to enable him to
prepare his defense, protect[s] him from subsequent prosecution
for the same offense, and if it enable[s] the court to know what
judgment to pronounce in the event of conviction.
State v. Coker,
312 N.C. 432, 434-435, 323 S.E.2d 343, 346 (1984).
The juvenile petition issued on 9 May 2002 alleged that the
juvenile unlawfully, willfully and feloniously, did assault [J.W]
and inflict serious bodily injury, in that the
defendant became
blind in his right eye after [P. B.] intentionally shot a B.B. gun
at him. (emphasis added). This statement alleges the elements of
assault inflicting serious bodily injury by establishing an
intentional assault on another person that resulted in serious
bodily injury.
Williams at 180, 571 S.E.2d at 622. Although the
word
defendant should have read
victim, the petition sufficiently
notified the defendant of the charge against him. This assignment
of error is overruled.
No error.
Judges TIMMONS-GOODSON and HUNTER concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***