Link to original WordPerfect file
Link to PDF file
How to access the above link?
Return to nccourts.org
Return to the Opinions Page
All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the North Carolina Reports and North Carolina Court of Appeals Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the North Carolina Reports and North Carolina Court of Appeals Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. TINA LYNN LOCKLEAR, Defendant
NO. COA05-509
Filed: 1 August 2006
1. Child Abuse and Neglect_bodily injury versus physical injury_sentence not
supported by instructions
It was error to sentence defendant for felonious child abuse inflicting serious bodily injury
where the jury was only instructed on the lesser offense of felony child abuse inflicting serious
physical injury. N.C.G.S. §§ 14-318.4(a), (a3).
2. Child Abuse or Neglect_subject matter jurisdiction_allegation that defendant a
parent or caregiver
The trial court failed to gain subject matter jurisdiction, and a conviction for felonious
child abuse was vacated, where the indictment did not allege the essential element that defendant
was a parent or other person providing care or supervision to a child.
3. Child Abuse and Neglect_child abuse_flawed indictment_lesser offense of
misdemeanor assault
A flawed indictment and verdict for felonious child abuse supported the lesser offense of
misdemeanor assault.
Appeal by Defendant from judgment entered 27 September 2004 by
Judge Gary L. Locklear in Superior Court, Robeson County. Heard in
the Court of Appeals 10 January 2006.
Attorney General Roy A. Cooper, III, by Assistant Attorney
General Laura E. Crumpler, for the State.
Paul F. Herzog for defendant-appellant.
WYNN, Judge.
An essential element of felonious child abuse is that injury
be inflicted by [a] parent or any other person providing care to
or supervision of a child less than 16 years of age[.]
(See footnote 1)
Defendantargues that since the indictment failed to include this element,
her conviction of felony child abuse must be vacated. Because the
indictment and jury verdict only support the entry of judgment for
the crime of misdemeanor assault, we must vacate Defendant's
conviction for felony child abuse and remand for re-sentencing.
On 1 October 2001, the grand jury of Robeson County indicted
Defendant Tina Lynn Locklear for felonious child abuse pursuant to
section 14-318.4(a) of the North Carolina General Statutes. The
indictment alleged that Ms. Locklear
unlawfully, willfully and feloniously did,
intentionally inflict serious bodily injury,
blunt force trauma, on [the victim], who was 2
years old and thus under 16 years of age, all
against the form of the statute in such case
made and provided and against the peace and
dignity of the State.
Nowhere did the indictment allege that Ms. Locklear was [a] parent
or any other person providing care to or supervision of a child[.]
N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 14-318.4(a), (a3) (2005).
Following presentation of the evidence, the trial court
instructed the jury regarding felonious child abuse as follows:
For you to find the defendant guilty of
this offense, the State must prove three
things beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, that the defendant was the parent
of the child;
Second, that, at the time, the child had
not reached her sixteenth birthday;
Third, that the defendant intentionally
assaulted the child which proximately resulted
in serious physical injury to the child.
. . .
Regarding the definition of a serious
injury: A serious physical injury is such
physical injury as causes great pain and
suffering.
The trial court repeated the above-stated instructions for felonious
child abuse inflicting serious physical injury three times. At
no point did the trial court instruct the jury regarding serious
bodily injury as alleged in the indictment.
Upon consideration of the evidence, the jury found Ms. Locklear
guilty of Felony Child Abuse-Serious Injury. From this
conviction, Ms. Locklear appeals contending it was error to sentence
her for felonious child abuse inflicting serious bodily injury, a
Class C felony, where the jury was only instructed on the lesser
offense of felony child abuse inflicting serious physical injury,
a Class E felony; and, the indictment failed to allege that she was
either a parent or caretaker of the child, an essential element of
the crime of felonious child abuse. We must agree.
I.
[1] Two separate crimes of felonious child abuse under North
Carolina law are relevant to this appeal _ (1) felonious child abuse
inflicting serious bodily injury and (2) felonious child abuse
inflicting serious physical injury.
Felonious child abuse inflicting serious bodily injury is
defined by section 14-318.4(a3), which states:
A parent or any other person providing care to
or supervision of a child less than 16 years of
age who intentionally inflicts any serious
bodily injury to the child or who intentionally
commits an assault upon the child which results
in any serious bodily injury to the child, or
which results in permanent or protracted loss
or impairment of any mental or emotional
function of the child, is guilty of a Class C
felony. Serious bodily injury is defined as
bodily injury that creates a substantial risk
of death, or that causes serious permanentdisfigurement, 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. § 14-318.4(a3).
The separate crime of felonious child abuse inflicting serious
physical injury is defined under section 14-318.4(a), which states:
A parent or any other person providing care to
or supervision of a child less than 16 years of
age who intentionally inflicts any serious
physical injury upon or to the child or who
intentionally commits an assault upon the child
which results in any serious physical injury to
the child is guilty of a Class E felony, except
as otherwise provided in subsection (a3) of
this section.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-318.4(a). Felonious child abuse inflicting
serious physical injury is defined as injuries that cause great
pain and suffering. State v. Phillips, 328 N.C. 1, 20, 399 S.E.2d
293, 303, cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1208, 115 L. Ed. 2d 977 (1991).
Felonious child abuse inflicting serious physical injury is
punishable as a Class E felony, whereas felonious child abuse
inflicting serious bodily injury is a more serious crime punishable
as a Class C felony. See N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 14-318.4(a), (a3).
Here, the indictment charged Ms. Locklear with inflicting
serious bodily injury whereas the record shows that the trial court
instructed the jury regarding serious physical injury, a lesser
crime. Because the trial court failed to instruct the jury
regarding serious bodily injury as alleged in the indictment, it
was error to sentence Ms. Locklear for felonious child abuse
inflicting serious bodily injury, a Class C felony, where the jurywas only instructed on the lesser offense of felony child abuse
inflicting serious physical injury, a Class E felony.
II.
[2]
Nonetheless, where the indictment does sufficiently allege
a lesser-included offense, we may remand for sentencing and entry
of judgment thereupon.
State v. Bullock, 154 N.C. App. 234, 245,
574 S.E.2d 17, 24 (2002).
But we cannot remand this matter for re-
sentencing on felony child abuse inflicting serious
physical injury
because the indictment in this case failed to allege an essential
element required for proof of that crime _
that injury be inflicted
by [a] parent or any other person providing care to or supervision
of a child less than 16 years of age[.]
(See footnote 2)
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-
318.4(a);
Phillips, 328 N.C. at 20, 399 S.E.2d at 302 (defining
felony child abuse as the intentional infliction of serious
injuries by
a caretaker to a child (emphasis added))
;
see also
State v. Carrilo, 149 N.C. App. 543, 549, 562 S.E.2d 47, 51 (2002)
(noting that
the evil that the legislature intended to suppress by
the felony child abuse statute is clearly the intentional infliction
of serious injury upon a child who is dependent upon another for his
or her care or supervision);
State v. Qualls, 130 N.C. App. 1, 8,
502 S.E.2d 31, 36 (1998) (stating that, All that is required to
indict a defendant for felonious child abuse is an allegation that
the defendant was the parent or guardian of the victim, a childunder the age of 16, and that the defendant intentionally inflicted
any serious injury upon the child.),
aff'd per curiam, 350 N.C. 56,
510 S.E.2d 376 (1999).
An indictment is insufficient if it fails to allege the
essential elements of the crime charged as required by Article I,
Section 22 of the North Carolina Constitution and our legislature
in N.C.G.S. § 15-144.
Bullock, 154 N.C. App. at 244, 574 S.E.2d
at 23. When an indictment has failed to allege the essential
elements of the crime charged, it has failed to give the trial court
subject matter jurisdiction over the matter, and the reviewing court
must arrest judgment.
Id. Failure of a criminal pleading to
charge the essential elements of the alleged offense is an error of
law which may be corrected upon appellate review even where the
defendant fails to object at the trial level.
State v. Sturdivant,
304 N.C. 293, 308, 283 S.E.2d 719, 729 (1981);
see also State v.
Wilson, 128 N.C. App. 688, 497 S.E.2d 416 (1998) (noting that a
challenge to the sufficiency of an indictment may be made for the
first time on appeal).
Here, the indictment failed to allege Ms. Locklear was [a]
parent or any other person providing care to or supervision of a
child, which is an essential element of the crime of felonious
child abuse.
See N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 14-318.4(a), (a3) (injury must
be inflicted by [a] parent or any other person providing care to
or supervision of a child less than 16 years of age);
Phillips, 328
N.C. at 20, 399 S.E.2d at 302.
As such, the trial court failed to
gain subject matter jurisdiction over the matter, and we musttherefore vacate Ms. Locklear's conviction of felonious child abuse.
Bullock, 154 N.C. App. at 244, 574 S.E.2d at 23.
III.
[3] Although the indictment fails to allege the crime of
felonious child abuse, it does sufficiently allege the
lesser-included offense of misdemeanor assault on a child under
section 14-33(c) of the North Carolina General Statutes which
states, in pertinent part as follows:
Unless the conduct is covered under some other
provision of law providing greater punishment,
any person who commits any assault, assault and
battery, or affray is guilty of a Class A1
misdemeanor if, in the course of the assault,
assault and battery, or affray, he or she:
(1) Inflicts serious injury upon another person
. . .
(3) Assaults a child under the age of 12 years;
. . ..
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-33(c) (2005).
Here, the indictment charged Ms. Locklear with felonious child
abuse inflicting serious injury upon a child, and the trial court
instructed the jury regarding felonious child abuse inflicting
serious physical injury. In doing so, the trial court instructed
the jury that to find Ms. Locklear guilty of felonious child abuse,
it had to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Ms. Locklear
intentionally assaulted the child, resulting in serious physical
injury to the child. The jury found Ms. Locklear guilty of
felonious child abuse inflicting serious injury. As such, the jury
necessarily found that Ms. Locklear assaulted the child, resulting
in serious injury to the child. Thus, the indictment and juryverdict support the entry of judgment for the crime of Class A1
misdemeanor assault.
In sum, we vacate the judgment of the trial court and remand
Ms. Locklear's case for re-sentencing on the crime of Class A1
misdemeanor assault.
Vacated and remanded for re-sentencing.
Judges HUNTER and JACKSON concur.
Footnote: 1
N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 14-318.4(a), (a3) (2005).
Footnote: 2
This element is also required for proof of the crime of
felonious child abuse inflicting serious bodily injury.
N.C.
Gen. Stat. § 14-318.4(a3).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***