State v. Glenn
726 S.E.2d 185
N.C. Ct. App.2012Background
- Defendant Glenn was indicted for felony possession with intent to sell/deliver cocaine, a pretrial-release offense, and attaining habitual felon status.
- Trial occurred June 6–9, 2011 in Rowan County Criminal Court; evidence centered on January 9, 2007 arrest scene at defendant’s apartment.
- Detective Walker encountered defendant during arrest; a struggle ensued and suspected contraband was moved in defendant’s hand.
- Two baggies containing cocaine were spit from defendant’s mouth during an attempted mouth-opening; forensic chemist testified the packages contained 0.03 grams of cocaine hydrochloride.
- Indictment was amended to reflect possession of cocaine (Class I); defense did not object to the amendment; defendant did not present evidence at trial.
- Jury found defendant guilty of felony possession and habitual felon status; defendant was sentenced to 80–105 months in prison.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was sufficient evidence to convict for possession of cocaine | Glenn argues a fatal variance: indictment claimed 0.1 g but evidence showed 0.03 g | State failed to prove the charged quantity and thus the offense | No fatal variance; sufficient evidence supported conviction |
| Whether the denial of motions to dismiss based on insufficiency of the evidence was proper | State overstated indictment language but proved the body of the charge | Discrepancy in indictment and proof invalidates the charge | Court did not err in denying motions to dismiss; evidence adequate |
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying substitute counsel | Questions about counsel’s effectiveness and defendant’s request for new counsel | Requests for substitute counsel should have been granted due to conflict/communication issues | No abuse of discretion; present counsel competent; no complete breakdown in communications |
| Whether the trial court should have declared a mistrial due to officers walking through the jury room | Three officers crossed through the jury assembly room; possible prejudice to jurors | No juror contact or prejudice established; mistrial not required | No error; denial of mistrial affirmed; contact was inadvertent and harmless |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Thacker, 301 N.C. 348, 271 S.E.2d 252 (1980) (N.C. 1980) (substitute counsel when defendant shows good cause; court must ensure competent assistance)
- State v. Nelson, 76 N.C.App. 371, 333 S.E.2d 499 (1985) (N.C. App. 1985) (complete breakdown in communications can require substitute counsel)
- State v. Prevatte, 356 N.C. 178, 570 S.E.2d 440 (2002) (N.C. 2002) (indigent defendant lacks right to substitute counsel for mere dissatisfaction)
- State v. Washington, 141 N.C.App. 354, 540 S.E.2d 388 (2000) (N.C. App. 2000) (mere suspicion of juror contact does not warrant automatic mistrial; discretionary rare)
- State v. Cradle, 281 N.C. 198, 188 S.E.2d 296 (1972) (N.C. 1972) (right to counsel and to effective assistance; error harmless beyond reasonable doubt standard)
- State v. Rutherford, 70 N.C.App. 674, 320 S.E.2d 916 (1984) (N.C. App. 1984) (trial court best positioned to assess misconduct and juror integrity)