233 N.C. App. 168
N.C. Ct. App.2014Background
- Defendant Beck was charged with driving while impaired in Mecklenburg County after a 12 Dec 2009 checkpoint arrest.
- Officer observed glossy eyes, strong odor of alcohol, and Beck admitted consuming two vodka drinks.
- Beck performed three field sobriety tests; breath test showed 0.10 alcohol concentration.
- Defendant presented expert Scott challenging Officer Pressley’s impairment conclusions and suggesting additional tests.
- Trial court used Pattern Instruction 270.20A; Beck requested two alternative special instructions about chemical analysis.
- Beck was convicted, sentenced to 60 days (suspended) and 12 months’ unsupervised probation; appeal followed alleging error in jury instructions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether denial of Beck’s special instruction on chemical analysis weight was error. | State argues pattern instruction correctly required proof beyond reasonable doubt. | Beck argues pattern instruction misled jurors and the special instruction was necessary. | No error; pattern instruction sufficient and did not mislead the jury. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Monk, 291 N.C. 37, 229 S.E.2d 163 (1976) (when correct in law, instructions may be given in substance)
- State v. Garvick, 98 N.C. App. 556, 392 S.E.2d 115 (1990) (pattern instruction covers necessary weight of chemical analysis evidence)
- State v. Narron, 193 N.C. App. 76, 666 S.E.2d 860 (2008) (language does not create a mandatory presumption; informs of admissibility of results)
- State v. Holden, 346 N.C. 404, 488 S.E.2d 514 (1997) (juror presumed to follow instructions; consider instructions as a whole)
- State v. Nicholson, 355 N.C. 1, 558 S.E.2d 109 (2002) (jurors weigh evidence; weight of testimony determined by jury)