State v. McAllister, 265 N.C. App. 309

McAllister and Stephanie Leonard met in treatment and lived together; on Feb 16, 2015 they drank heavily and had a physical altercation in which Leonard suffered facial injuries and lost her wallet.
Police recovered evidence (wallet, apartment bloodstains) and played McAllister’s recorded interview in which he admitted that the encounter became physical.
McAllister was charged with multiple offenses; a jury convicted him only of assault on a female (the predicate for habitual misdemeanor assault). He admitted prior convictions and was sentenced for habitual misdemeanor assault.
Defense counsel’s closing acknowledged the defendant’s admission and stated "he did wrong, God knows he did," while arguing the State hadn’t proved the more serious sexual offenses.
McAllister filed a motion for appropriate relief (MAR) alleging ineffective assistance and conflict of interest; the trial court denied the MAR for lack of supporting affidavits/documentary evidence.
On certiorari review the majority held no per se Harbison violation and rejected ineffective-assistance claims for lack of demonstrated prejudice; a dissent argued Harbison required a new trial because counsel conceded guilt without on-the-record consent.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether defense counsel’s closing argument conceded guilt without defendant’s consent in violation of Harbison (per se ineffective assistance)	State: No Harbison violation because counsel did not expressly concede the charged crime or all elements; at most counsel acknowledged an element/admission	McAllister: Counsel conceded he "did wrong" and relied on the admission to attack only the greater charges, so counsel admitted guilt to assault on a female without consent	Majority: No Harbison violation—counsel at most admitted an element/admission and did not concede full guilt; use Strickland instead; defendant showed no prejudice. Dissent: Would find a Harbison per se violation and would order a new trial.
Whether the trial court erred by summarily denying the MAR for lack of supporting affidavits/evidence	McAllister: MAR alleged conflicts and deficient performance; court should have held an evidentiary hearing	State: MAR lacked affidavits/documentary support as required by statute	Held: No error—statutory requirement unmet; summary denial proper; certiorari petition to review MAR denied.

State v. Harbison, 315 N.C. 175 (declares counsel may not admit client guilt to jury without on-the-record consent; per se Sixth Amendment violation)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two-prong ineffective assistance test: deficient performance and prejudice)
State v. Fisher, 318 N.C. 512 (admission of an element by counsel does not necessarily constitute a Harbison violation)
State v. Gainey, 355 N.C. 73 (counsel’s acknowledgement of defendant’s involvement did not concede guilt to charged crimes; Harbison not triggered)
State v. Randle, 167 N.C. App. 547 (defense argument questioning element severity did not concede guilt; distinguished from Harbison)