State v. Baker
208 N.C. App. 376
| N.C. Ct. App. | 2010Background
- Defendant Antonio Baker was convicted on 17 September 2009 of carrying a concealed gun and a felon in possession of a firearm.
- Officers pursued Baker after a patrol near Guardian Care in Roanoke Rapids on 23 October 2008 at about 11:00 p.m.
- Prior that day, Guardian Care incidents (break-ins and vandalism) had occurred; RRPD had no suspects in custody at the time.
- Officer Moseley conducted a protective encounter, conducted a pat-down after detecting alcohol odor and defendant’s apparent nervousness.
- The pat-down yielded a gun butt; Officer Moseley and Hardy placed Baker in handcuffs.
- Baker moved to suppress the evidence as the fruit of an unlawful stop/search; the court denied the motion, and Baker was convicted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the trial court err by not issuing findings of fact and conclusions of law? | Baker; failure to comply with 15A-977(f) warrants reversal. | State; de novo review of legal conclusions suffices when bench rationale is given. | Reversed for lack of required findings; remanded for findings. |
| Was there a material conflict in the suppression hearing evidence? | Baker; evidence on number of officers and arrival times controverts State. | State; only minor conflicts exist (e.g., location) not material. | Yes, material conflict existed; findings required. |
| Did the absence of findings prevent meaningful appellate review of suppression? | Baker; without findings, cannot assess Fourth Amendment propriety. | State; bench rationale supports admissibility. | Remand necessary; cannot address merits. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Williams, 195 N.C.App. 554 (2009) (grounds for implied findings when bench rationale and no material conflict exist)
- State v. Phillips, 300 N.C. 678 (1980) (better practice to find all facts upon which admissibility depends)
- State v. Horner, 310 N.C. 274 (1984) (findings and conclusions aid meaningful appellate review)
- State v. Shelly, 181 N.C.App. 196 (2007) (discusses when failure to enter findings may be nonfatal)
- State v. Jacobs, 174 N.C.App. 1 (2005) (cross-examination can affect material conflicts)
- State v. Toney, 187 N.C.App. 465 (2007) (no material conflict where only one witness/testimony)
- State v. Munoz, 141 N.C.App. 675 (2001) (discusses suppression standards (contextual))
- State v. Icard, 363 N.C. 303 (2009) (enumerates factors for determining seizure)
- In re Hardy, 294 N.C. 90 (1978) (statutory interpretation guiding mandatory/may language)