State v. Clark
211 N.C. App. 60
N.C. Ct. App.2011Background
- Clark was convicted by Alford plea to first degree rape after suppression of statements and related charges were resolved; SBM hearing followed sentencing.
- Trial court sentenced Clark to 156–197 months and ordered lifetime SBM based on statutory criteria.
- Clark moved to suppress his statements from May 2–3, 2006, arguing Miranda warnings were not given and coercion occurred.
- The suppression motion was denied verbally; a written order later entered with extensive findings of fact and law.
- Clark appealed the suppression ruling and separately challenged the SBM lifetime enrollment via writ of certiorari after an oral notice of appeal.
- Appellate review addressed whether the suppression ruling was correct under Miranda standards and whether lifetime SBM was properly imposed under § 14-208.40A.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether suppression denial properly analyzed custody for Miranda | Clark | Clark | No reversible error; findings support no custodial interrogation requiring warnings. |
| Whether Clark's SBM lifetime enrollment is properly appealable | State | Clark | Writ of certiorari granted to review SBM order; oral notice of appeal was sufficient under equities, but see discussion on jurisdiction. |
| Whether the trial court erred in finding the offense to be an 'aggravated offense' for SBM purposes | State | Clark | First degree rape fit within 'aggravated offense' under §14-208.6(1a) by using force/being a victim under 12; conviction elements suffice without examining underlying facts. |
| Whether Clark received ineffective assistance of counsel regarding SBM ex post facto challenge | State | Clark | No relief; SBM civil/regulatory regime not criminal; no ineffective assistance due to Bowditch framework. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Waring, 364 N.C. 443 (2010) (custody and Miranda analysis factors; not under arrest when informed otherwise)
- State v. Crudup, 157 N.C.App. 657 (2003) (custodial interrogation standard; de novo review of custody questions)
- State v. Davison, 201 N.C.App. 354 (2009) (elements-based test for 'aggravated offense' under SBM statutes)
- State v. Holden, 338 N.C. 394 (1994) (rape as a crime of violence; supports use/violence interpretation for SBM)
- State v. Bowditch, 364 N.C. 335 (2010) (SBM regime is civil/regulatory; impacts ex post facto analysis)