State v. Juarez, 369 N.C. 351

On Oct. 31, 2012 Jorge Juarez shot into Alfonzo Canjay’s moving vehicle; the bullet fatally struck Canjay. Juarez did not dispute firing the shot.
State charged Juarez with first-degree felony murder based on the underlying felony of discharging a firearm into an occupied vehicle while in operation.
At trial the court denied Juarez’s requests for instructions on lesser-included offenses (second-degree murder and voluntary manslaughter). The court instructed on perfect self-defense and included the aggressor doctrine; Juarez did not object to that instruction.
Jury convicted Juarez of first-degree felony murder; trial court sentenced him to life without parole.
Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, holding the trial court erred by not instructing on lesser-included offenses and by giving the aggressor doctrine instruction as plain error. State sought discretionary review.
North Carolina Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals: held no error in rejecting lesser-included instructions and, assuming the aggressor instruction was erroneous, it did not constitute plain error prejudicial enough to require reversal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Juarez)	Held
Whether trial court erred by refusing to instruct on lesser-included offenses (2nd-degree murder, voluntary manslaughter)	Millsaps requires lesser instructions when evidence of the underlying felony is in conflict; State says evidence of the underlying felony here is not in conflict so no instruction required	Argued there was conflicting evidence about self-defense that should allow jury to consider lesser offenses	Court: No error; when first-degree murder is prosecuted solely on felony-murder theory, lesser instructions are required only if evidence conflicts as to commission of the underlying felony — here defendant admitted discharging into occupied vehicle, so no conflict and no rational basis to convict of lesser offenses while acquitting of felony murder.
Whether instructing jury on the aggressor doctrine of self-defense was plain error	Instruction was proper contextually; even if erroneous, State says any error was not prejudicial enough under plain-error standard	Court of Appeals held there was no evidence Juarez was the aggressor, so instructing on aggressor doctrine was reversible error	Court: Even assuming instruction was erroneous, defendant failed to show probable impact on verdict under plain-error standard; no plain error.

State v. Bell, 338 N.C. 363 (expressing felony-murder policy to hold accountable deaths during felonies)
State v. Richardson, 341 N.C. 658 (self-defense is not a defense to felony murder; perfect self-defense may negate underlying felony)
State v. Bush, 307 N.C. 152 (perfect vs. imperfect self-defense; perfect excuses killing)
State v. Marsh, 293 N.C. 353 (elements of perfect self-defense, including non-aggressor requirement)
State v. Millsaps, 356 N.C. 556 (trial court must instruct on lesser-included offenses when evidence of the underlying felony is in conflict)
State v. Thomas, 325 N.C. 583 (lesser instruction required where evidence conflicts on defendant’s participation in the underlying felony)
State v. Camacho, 337 N.C. 224 (lesser instruction required where evidence conflicts on means of killing underlying first-degree theory)
State v. Lawrence, 365 N.C. 506 (plain-error standard and prejudice requirement)
State v. Odom, 307 N.C. 655 (plain-error-framework articulation)
State v. Moore, 363 N.C. 793 (elements of perfect self-defense reiterated)