STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
v
.
Rockingham County
No. 04 CRS 52271
CAROLINE JOHNSON AIKEN
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General
Leonard G. Green, for the State.
Marilyn G. Ozer, for defendant-appellant.
LEVINSON, Judge.
Defendant (Caroline Johnson Aiken) appeals judgment entered
upon her conviction for second degree murder. We find no error.
The pertinent facts may be summarized as follows: On 15 July
2004, a group of friends including defendant and Algene Aiken (the
deceased, herein Aiken) gathered in the yard of Jim Millner,
located in Eden, North Carolina. Defendant and Aiken stayed at
Millner's about 20-30 minutes. When defendant and Aiken left
Millner's yard, they left in a vehicle Aiken drove while defendant
rode in the passenger's seat. Aiken backed the car out of the
driveway into the street and pulled up to a stop sign at an
intersection, which was about 60 or 70 feet from Millner's home. Instead of proceeding through the intersection, the vehicle
remained stationary at the corner for a few “minutes.”
Margret Carter, who was present in Millner's backyard on the
day in question, testified that she initially saw defendant lean
over as if she was showing him some type of affection while the car
remained at the intersection. However, Carter further testified
that she observed defendant's arm reaching out of one of the car's
windows with what she thought looked like a knife. A few minutes
later, the vehicle returned to the vicinity of Millner's home and
Carter observed that Aiken was bleeding from his chest and
subsequently heard Aiken say, “take me to the hospital.” Carter
also testified that defendant had her hand over Aiken's chest and
stated, “I am sorry. I didn't mean to do it.”
Additionally, Garnett and Stuart Edwards were in a vehicle in
the vicinity and were stopped at the same intersection as defendant
and Aiken. Garnett Edwards, the driver, saw the defendant lean
over Aiken and make four or five stabbing motions with an object
that appeared to be a screwdriver as Aiken was “defending himself.”
Stuart Edwards, the passenger, heard defendant speaking loudly and
also saw an object in her hand that looked like a screwdriver which
she “swung” at Aiken four or five times.
Brian Ziglar was also driving in the area when the incident
of 15 July 2004 occurred. Zigler observed a woman lean over on the
driver's side of the car with her back almost to the windshield.
The woman was “fussing at [Aiken], going off and carrying on.”
Ziglar further testified that defendant pulled a shiny object,which appeared to be a knife, up in the air and “stabbed” at the
man three or four times as he raised his arm.
When local law enforcement arrived at the scene, defendant
reached inside the car on the passenger side and removed a bone
handled knife, which she handed to Officer John Whitsett. In
defendant's statement to Detective Greg Light, defendant stated
that she got angry when she observed hand signals between Margret
Carter and Aiken, which defendant interpreted as an indication that
the two would meet together at some point in the future. Defendant
then stated that when she and Aiken were in the vehicle, “I reached
into my pocketbook and got my knife out and opened it. I then
started swinging at him with the knife. I then stabbed him in the
chest and blood started coming out.” When Sergeant Light told
defendant that the hospital had called and Aiken had died, she fell
to the floor “and she was visibly upset, crying, yelling.”
Dr. Anthony Macri, a pathologist at Morehead Hospital in Eden,
North Carolina, conducted an autopsy of Aiken's body. He testified
that the cause of death was a single two and a half inch deep stab
wound that pierced a large blood vessel in Aiken's right lung. The
wound caused massive bleeding in the right side of Aiken's chest
which caused his lung to collapse. Dr. Marci testified that the
injury to Aiken was “inconsistent with an accident.”
Additionally, on at least two previous occasions before the
subject incident that resulted in the death of Aiken, defendant and
Aiken were involved in altercations in which defendant threatened
Aiken with violence. For example, on 13 July 2004, two days beforethe subject incident, Rockingham County Deputy Sheriff Nori Kaneko
responded to a 911 call for assistance at Bob Trail in Stoneville,
North Carolina. Kaneko found Aiken and defendant engaged in an
argument. He separated the couple and asked the
defendant to step
back into the mobile home. Deputy Kaneko noticed a small
pocketknife in defendant's right hand. He repeatedly asked her to
drop it and was forced to pull his service revolver. On 9 July
2004, Warren Hairston, a friend of Aiken, was talking with him in
the parking lot of a barber shop. Aiken was sitting in the car
when defendant drove up. Defendant went over to Aiken's car and
began cursing loudly at him, at which point he rolled the window up
to within two inches of being closed. The defendant then stated,
“If you roll the window down, I'll cut your damn fingers off.” As
defendant was leaving, she said, “I'll kill your damn a[--].”
Defendant was convicted of second degree murder and sentenced
to a term of 180 - 225 months incarceration. From this judgment
defendant appeals contending, inter alia, that the trial court
erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the charge of involuntary
manslaughter because there was evidence from which the jury could
find that defendant stabbed Aiken unintentionally or as a result of
culpable negligence. We disagree.
The trial court must give a requested
instruction, at least in substance, if a
defendant requests it and the instruction is
correct in law and supported by the evidence.
In determining whether the evidence supports
an instruction requested by a defendant, the
evidence must be interpreted in the light most
favorable to him. The trial judge making the
decision must focus on the sufficiency of the
evidence, not the credibility of the evidence.Failure to give the requested instruction
where required is a reversible error.
State v. Reynolds, 160 N.C. App. 579, 581, 586 S.E.2d 798, 800
(2003)(citations omitted).
“Involuntary manslaughter is the unintentional killing of a
human being without malice, proximately caused by (1) an unlawful
act not amounting to a felony nor naturally dangerous to human
life, or (2) a culpably negligent act or omission.” State v.
Evans, 149 N.C. App. 767, 775, 562 S.E.2d 102, 107 (2002) (internal
quotation marks omitted). “Culpable negligence is defined as an
act or omission evidencing a disregard for human rights and
safety.” State v. James, 342 N.C. 589, 595, 466 S.E.2d 710, 714
(1996).
In the instant case, as defendant's actions were naturally
dangerous to human life, we are left to ascertain whether the
record could support an unintentional killing of Aiken without
malice by means of a culpably negligent act or omission.
Defendant argues the following evidence supports a jury
instruction on involuntary manslaughter: testimony by Officer
Johnson and Margret Carter that defendant stated the stabbing of
Aiken was an “accident” and that she “didn't mean to do it”;
defendant's realization that when she stabbed Aiken she stopped and
held Aiken's chest to stop the bleeding; and defendant's assertion
that despite using threatening language and gestures, including
showing a knife in the past, she had not previously injured Aiken.
However, the gravamen of the evidence which defendant relies
on is comprised of after-the-fact self-serving declarations. Onthese facts, these declarations do not support culpable negligence.
See State v. Stanton, 319 N.C. 180, 191, 353 S.E.2d 385, 392 (1987)
(citing State v. Brower, 289 N.C. 644, 224 S.E.2d 551 (1976)
(“[t]estimony of a self-serving declaration made by a defendant
following an alleged crime is incompetent as substantive
evidence”), State v. Campbell, 42 N.C. App. 361, 364-65, 256
S.E.2d 526, 529 (1979) (trial court did not err in failing to
instruct the jury on involuntary manslaughter where there was no
direct evidence of an unintentional killing and all probative
evidence tended to support that defendant intentionally shot the
victim), and State v. Hancock, 28 N.C. App. 149, 152, 220 S.E.2d
167, 169 (1975) (defendant's subjective self-serving statement that
he thought the gun was empty without evidence of other facts and
circumstances to raise an inference of an unintentional act was
insufficient to warrant an instruction on involuntary
manslaughter)).
In contrast to defendant's assertion, the record contains
plenary evidence of an intentional stabbing. Several witnesses
testified that defendant leaned over and stabbed Aiken several
times with an object that appeared to be a knife or screwdriver.
In addition, defendant admitted that she was angry at Aiken for
engaging in “hand signals” with another woman and, as a result,
“reached into [her] pocketbook and got [her] knife out” and
“started swinging at him with the knife” and “stabbed him in the
chest.” Dr. Macri testified that, in his opinion, the two and a
half inch deep stab wound was inconsistent with an accidental orunintentional injury. And on at least two occasions prior to the
events of 15 July 2004, defendant threatened Aiken with violence,
including brandishing a knife on one occasion.
We conclude the trial court did not err by failing to give an
instruction on involuntary manslaughter. This assignment of error
is overruled.
We have evaluated defendant's remaining argument on appeal and
conclude that it is without merit.
No error.
Judges TYSON and BRYANT concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***