STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
v. Forsyth County
No. 03 CRS 51472
MARCER BRANERD WALKER
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Special Deputy Attorney
General Kay Linn Miller Hobart, for the State.
Bruce T. Cunningham, Jr. for defendant-appellant.
ELMORE, Judge.
Defendant was found guilty as charged of assault with a deadly
weapon inflicting serious injury. He was sentenced to a minimum
term of 20 months and a maximum term of 33 months.
Christopher Brunson testified that on 10 February 2003 at the
bus terminal in Winston-Salem, he and defendant engaged in an
altercation over Brunson's relationship with defendant's
girlfriend. Brunson initiated the fight by striking defendant with
his fist. Defendant stepped back and removed a brick or rock from
his pocket. Brunson landed a flurry of punches on defendant.
Defendant swung a rock or brick at Brunson, lacerating Brunson's
forehead. Defendant struck him with the object a couple of more
times on the head and then left the scene. Brunson was transportedto Baptist Hospital, where the laceration to his forehead was
sutured.
Wanda Justus testified for the prosecution that she was at the
Winston-Salem Transit Authority bus station downtown on 10 February
2003 when she saw two men, whom she identified as Brunson and
defendant, engage in an altercation. She saw Brunson “beating on”
defendant, who stepped back and hit Brunson “upside his head” with
a brick or rock.
Anastasia Taylor Baldwin, who is defendant's girlfriend,
testified for defendant that she saw the two men fight but that
defendant did not strike Brunson with a rock or brick. Brunson
lacerated his head when he fell against a brick wall.
Defendant also testified that he did not hit Brunson with a
brick or rock and that Brunson cut himself when he fell.
Defendant's sole contention is that the court erred by
allowing Brunson to testify, over objection, that he “received
information that [defendant's girlfriend] was being abused.” The
assignment of error upon which this contention is based states that
the testimony was “irrelevant and prejudicial.” However, in his
brief he argues the testimony was hearsay and was improperly
admitted in violation of the Confrontation Clause. At trial
defendant interposed only a general objection. Because he failed
to object to the statement as inadmissible hearsay, the issue of
whether the testimony constituted such is not properly before us.
State v. Nobles, 350 N.C. 483, 500-01, 515 S.E.2d 885, 896 (1999);
State v. Johnson, 340 N.C. 32, 47, 455 S.E.2d 644, 651 (1995). Even if defendant had objected on the ground of hearsay,
defendant's contention does not have merit. Hearsay is a
declaration by one other than the testifying witness which is
offered for the truth of the matter asserted. N.C. Gen. Stat. §
8C-1, Rule 801(c). If the statement is offered for any other
purpose, then it is admissible. State v. Coffey, 326 N.C. 268,
282, 389 S.E.2d 48, 56 (1990). Here, the evidence was not offered
to show that defendant's girlfriend was abused but to show
Brunson's state of mind and to explain his conduct.
No error.
Judges BRYANT and GEER concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***