State v. Fletcher, 370 N.C. 313

Background

Defendant Harold Fletcher married Theresa and acted as a father-figure to Theresa’s daughter Diane; investigators later seized images and videos from Fletcher’s computer showing Diane partially undressed and several images showing a penis at or near Diane’s mouth. Fletcher admitted recording images for sexual gratification but argued some images were digitally manipulated and denied touching Diane.
A grand jury indicted Fletcher on multiple counts including first-degree sexual exploitation of a minor (alleging he used/induced Diane to engage in oral intercourse for the purpose of producing visual material), attempted statutory sex offense, secret peeping, and taking indecent liberties.
At trial the court refused Fletcher’s requested jury instruction that “oral intercourse” requires penetration, allowed counsel to argue competing definitions, and overruled Fletcher’s objection when the prosecutor told jurors that altered images could still support first-degree exploitation.
The jury convicted Fletcher of first-degree sexual exploitation and other counts; the trial court sentenced him to consecutive terms and required sex-offender registration. Fletcher appealed to the Court of Appeals, which affirmed; the Supreme Court granted discretionary review.
The Supreme Court held the prosecutor’s closing argument misstated the law (images altered to simulate sexual activity do not suffice for first-degree exploitation), but that error was not prejudicial; it also held the trial court did not err in refusing Fletcher’s requested penetration instruction because “oral intercourse” does not require penetration under the sexual-exploitation statutes.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the prosecutor’s closing statement that altered/fabricated images may suffice for first-degree sexual exploitation misstated law and required a new trial	State: Argument reflected a reasonable inference from statute and, if imperfect, was cured by correct jury instructions	Fletcher: Statement mischaracterized statutory requirement that a minor actually engage in sexual activity; his defense (images digitally manipulated) was prejudiced	Court: Statement was an erroneous legal statement but trial error was harmless; no reasonable possibility verdict would differ absent the remark
Whether “oral intercourse” in N.C.G.S. §14‑190.13(5)(b) requires penetration “however slight”	State: Term should be read to capture oral acts (fellatio/cunnilingus) without requiring penetration; adoption of penetration requirement would unduly narrow protection	Fletcher: By analogy to vaginal/anal intercourse (which require penetration), “oral intercourse” should also require penetration; requested instruction correct in law	Court: “Oral intercourse” does not require penetration; trial court did not err in refusing the requested instruction

Key Cases Cited

State v. Ratliff, 341 N.C. 610 (1996) (incorrect statements of law in closing are improper and trial judge should sustain objections and instruct jury to disregard)
State v. Monk, 286 N.C. 509 (1975) (parties have wide latitude in closing argument)
State v. Goss, 361 N.C. 610 (2007) (prosecutor may argue law, facts in evidence, and reasonable inferences)
State v. Walston, 367 N.C. 721 (2014) (jury charge duty to explain law and essential elements clearly)
Cinema I Video, Inc. v. Thornburg, 320 N.C. 485 (1987) (origins and purposes of North Carolina child pornography statutes)
United States v. Williams, 553 U.S. 285 (2008) (federal statute addressed criminalizing pandering/solicitation of child pornography; context distinguished from state statute at issue)
State v. Ludlum, 303 N.C. 666 (1981) (interpreting sexual acts like cunnilingus and noting burdens of proof and statutory construction concerns)
State v. Goodson, 313 N.C. 318 (1985) (defining fellatio/oral sex as contact between mouth and sex organs without reference to penetration)
State v. Brown, 312 N.C. 237 (1984) (holding vaginal intercourse requires slightest penetration)
State v. Atkins, 311 N.C. 272 (1984) (holding anal intercourse requires penetration)