State v. Hurd, 246 N.C. App. 281

Background

Defendant Justin Duane Hurd (Black) was convicted by a jury of three counts of first-degree murder, two counts of first-degree kidnapping, and one count of first-degree arson for a February 3, 2008 triple homicide; court imposed three consecutive life-without-parole sentences.
The State’s case was circumstantial: no eyewitnesses to the killings; two jailhouse inmates testified Hurd claimed responsibility and said an eyewitness (Nathaniel Sanders) had been killed. Sanders died in 2008 in Cincinnati and someone else was later charged in his death; the trial court took judicial notice of that fact.
During jury selection the defense used peremptory strikes heavily against white/Hispanic venire members and attempted to strike Juror 10 (white male); the State objected under Batson (reverse-Batson). The court reviewed the parties’ explanations and kept Juror 10, finding the strike pretextual.
Defense filed a pretrial motion seeking to prohibit the State from peremptorily striking Black jurors; the court denied it (no prior showing of discrimination).
At trial the State argued in closing that Hurd had Sanders killed; defense objected but the court overruled. The defense preserved an argument about closing slides for federal review only.

Issues

Issue	State's Argument	Hurd's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court clearly erred in sustaining the State’s reverse-Batson objection to a defense peremptory strike of Juror 10	The pattern of strikes (large majority against white/Hispanic jurors), defense’s low acceptance rate for white jurors, and the court’s assessment of demeanor show the strike was race-motivated	The strike was race-neutral: Juror 10 favored punishment fitting the crime and showed pro-death-penalty disposition — a legitimate, nonracial reason	No error: court’s credibility findings and totality-of-circumstances review supported conclusion that the strike was pretextual and race was a motivating factor
Whether the State’s closing argument (asserting Hurd had Sanders killed) was grossly improper so the court should have intervened ex mero motu	Closing was based on admitted evidence (jailhouse statements, timing of Sanders’s death, and judicial notice) and reasonable inference that Hurd arranged Sanders’s death	Argument improperly asserted Hurd had Sanders killed and the court erred in overruling defense objection	No error: prosecutor’s inference was grounded in evidence/judicial notice; not grossly improper; overruling objection not an abuse of discretion
Whether the State’s closing-argument slides violated due process by shifting burden of proof	Slides asked where defense’s evidence/witnesses were — permissible argument about gaps in defendant’s case	Slides impermissibly suggested burdens on Hurd or misallocated the State’s burden of proof	No error assigned on this state-law appeal point; issue preserved for federal review only

Key Cases Cited

Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (establishing the three-step test for race-based peremptory challenges)
State v. Waring, 364 N.C. 443 (N.C. 2010) (discussing Batson inquiry under state law)
State v. Taylor, 362 N.C. 514 (N.C. 2008) (adopting Batson framework in state courts)
State v. James, 230 N.C. App. 346 (N.C. Ct. App. 2013) (appellate review standard for Batson determinations)
State v. Cofield, 129 N.C. App. 268 (N.C. Ct. App. 1998) (recognizing reverse-Batson challenges)
State v. Robinson, 336 N.C. 78 (N.C. 1994) (factors relevant to finding purposeful discrimination)
State v. Maness, 363 N.C. 261 (N.C. 2009) (burden-shifting and race-neutral explanation step)
State v. Jones, 355 N.C. 117 (N.C. 2002) (closing-argument review standard; when court must act ex mero motu)
State v. Call, 353 N.C. 400 (N.C. 2001) (permitted scope of prosecutorial argument in capital cases)