State v. Copley, 265 N.C. App. 254

Background

On Aug. 6, 2016, Kourey Thomas was shot and killed outside Jalen Lewis’s house; Chad C. Copley (Defendant), who lived two or three houses away, fired a single shot from inside his dark, attached garage and admitted the shooting to responding deputies.
Defendant called 911 earlier, said he was "locked and loaded" and "I'm going to kill him," then retrieved a shotgun and went to the garage; he testified he believed some outside partygoers displayed weapons and that Thomas pulled a gun while running toward the house.
The State presented evidence of Defendant’s 911 statements, the broken garage window, and Deputy Carroll’s on-scene interrogation and seizure of the shotgun; the jury convicted Defendant of first-degree murder (premeditation/deliberation and lying in wait).
At trial the prosecutor, during rebuttal, made repeated remarks invoking race (arguing Defendant was "scared of these black males" and asking whether the victim would have been shot if he were white); defense objected repeatedly and the court overruled.
The majority held those race-based rebuttal comments were a gratuitous, unsupported injection of race that prejudiced Defendant and warranted vacatur and a new trial; the court did not reach other instructional issues but noted potential problems with the habitation jury instruction and pattern language about "home"/"curtilage."

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether prosecutor’s race-based rebuttal argument was improper and prejudicial	Prosecutor: argued race could explain motive or bias; urged jury to weigh whether fear based on race was reasonable	Defendant: argued remarks gratuitously injected race without evidence, inflamed prejudice, and deprived him of a fair trial	Held: Improper and prejudicial; statements gratuitously injected race; convictions vacated and new trial granted
Whether trial court erred by denying objections to prosecutor’s gang/race equivalence	State: gang-color evidence and reasonableness of fear justified inquiry about race as possible factor	Defendant: no evidence linked gang color, race, or Defendant’s motive; argument equated gangs with black males unsupported and offensive	Held: State’s gang/race equivalence unsupported and disapproved; part of prosecutor’s comments condemned
Whether denial of motion to dismiss/self-defense/habitation instructions were erroneous (provocation/aggressor)	State: evidence supported instructions including provocation and aggressor concepts; jurors could find Defendant provoked by arming and escalating	Defendant: jury instructions (esp. that habitation not available to aggressor) were erroneous and could have misled jury; plain error	Held: Majority did not reach merits (new trial); noted pattern instruction may not reflect statutory definition of "home/curtilage" and should be updated; dissent would have upheld instructions
Whether lying-in-wait instruction was supported by evidence	State: evidence Defendant concealed in dark garage and fired through window supported lying-in-wait theory	Defendant: he armed to protect home and fired without intent to lie in wait	Held: Majority did not decide (new trial); dissent argued evidence supported lying-in-wait instruction

Key Cases Cited

McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (prohibition on racially biased prosecutorial arguments)
State v. Walters, 357 N.C. 68 (preservation of objections during closing argument; review standard)
State v. Jones, 355 N.C. 117 (prosecutorial appeals to passion/prejudice; reversible error)
State v. Williams, 339 N.C. 1 (gratuitous emphasis on race in argument impermissible)
State v. Diehl, 353 N.C. 433 (race may be argued when supported by evidence and material to issues)
State v. Moose, 310 N.C. 482 (racial motive argument permissible where record supports it)
State v. Cabrera, 700 N.W.2d 469 (Minn. 2005) (new trial warranted where prosecutor gratuitously injected race into closing)