State v. Gray
210 N.C. App. 493
| N.C. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Defendant GRAY was convicted by jury of first-degree sex offense and indecent liberties with a child; sentence 288–315 months and 19–23 months respectively, run consecutively.
- Victim was five years old; assault occurred at grandparents' house where Defendant frequented via connection with the uncle.
- Mother observed Defendant retreat when she entered the room; child reported Defendant touched her vagina and caused a burning sensation.
- Dr. Hayek examined the child; hymenal injury healed and could be from prior penetrating contact; no conclusive evidence of sexual abuse the day before exam.
- Forensic interviewer Bullock described the child as very intelligent and able to name family members; child testified that Defendant touched her.
- Trial court admitted evidence of a 1990 South Carolina assault conviction (on a four-year-old boy) under Rule 404(b); defense objected; the conviction was used for identity, intent, and common plan.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 404(b) evidence of prior assault was admissible | State argues admissible to show identity/intent/common plan | Gray contends evidence is too remote and lacks probative similarity | No; admission error under 404(b) |
| Whether remoteness in time invalidates 404(b) admission | State relies on similarity despite time gap | Remoteness makes evidence prejudicial/irrelevant | Remoteness undermines admissibility; must weigh time gap |
| Whether admission prejudiced the defendant requiring a new trial | Evidence supported by other testimony; probative value | Prejudicial impact outweighed any value | Yes; prejudice substantially outweighs probative value; new trial warranted |
| Whether admission for common scheme/intent was proper given similarities | Two acts show common plan/intent in sexual offenses | Cases show lack of substantial similarities and long lapse | Not proper; insufficient similarities; favors remand |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Carpenter, 361 N.C. 382, 646 S.E.2d 105 (2007) (Rule 404(b) analysis and prior acts admission guidance)
- State v. Jones, 322 N.C. 585, 369 S.E.2d 822 (1988) (Remoteness in time affects admissibility and must be considered in 404(b))
- State v. Smoak, 213 N.C. 79, 195 S.E. 72 (1938) (Prior like offenses admissible to prove motive/science; remoteness weighed)
- State v. Stager, 329 N.C. 278, 406 S.E.2d 876 (1991) (Remoteness generally affects weight, not always admissibility)
- State v. Al-Bayyinah, 356 N.C. 150, 567 S.E.2d 120 (2002) (Moderate remoteness; balance of prejudice and probative value)
- State v. Gammons, 258 N.C. 522, 128 S.E.2d 860 (1963) (Early Rule 404(b) discussions on admissibility)