State v. Privette, 218 N.C. App. 459

Defendant Smith was convicted of felonious possession of stolen goods and habitual felon status; Def. Privette was convicted of felonious possession of stolen goods, extortion, conspiracy to commit extortion, and habitual felon status.
Perry Brothers Jewelers was robbed; rings were later connected to Privette/Smith via A-Town Jewelz transaction and related custody of the Murano rental and receipts.
Recorded jailhouse conversations and post-arrest communications involved efforts to coerce victims to confess and to influence testimony related to the Perry Brothers robbery.
Smith and Privette were tried together by jury; some charges were dismissed, and both defendants later pled guilty to habitual felon status before sentencing.
On appeal, the court affirmed Smith’s convictions, reversed Privette’s possession-of-stolen-goods conviction, and remanded for a new trial on Privette’s extortion-related offenses due to evidentiary errors.
Overall disposition: no error for Smith; Privette’s possession conviction reversed; Privette entitled to a new trial on extortion-related charges.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Joinder of defendants for trial	Smith: joinder was improper due to prejudice from co-defendant evidence	Smith: joinder violated fairness by mixing defenses and evidence	Joinder affirmed; no abuse of discretion; did not deny a fair trial
Admission of gang-related evidence against Smith	State: gang context probative to motive and identity	Smith: gang evidence biased verdict; prejudicial	Harmless error; overwhelming evidence of guilt; no reversal for Smith
Extortion-related jury instruction sufficiency	Instruction properly stated law under §14-118.4	Instruction misstated law by focusing on entitlement/rights	Instruction consistent with statute; no reversal for Privette
Sufficiency of evidence of Privette’s possession of stolen goods	Constructive possession shown by gang status, presence at related sites, and involvement in surrounding events	No direct possession; no sufficient incriminating circumstances	Insufficient evidence; reversed Privette’s possession conviction
Admission of 11 June 2009 telephone conversation	Conversation provided context for extortion-related acts	Conversation was irrelevant to authority and overly prejudicial	Admission was error; as to Privette, contributed to adequate basis for new trial on extortion-related counts

State v. Greenspan, 92 N.C. App. 563 (1989) (wrongful obtaining must be unlawful; evidence must show unjust means)
State v. Gayton, 185 N.C. App. 122 (2007) (gang evidence may be harmless where guilt is overwhelming)
State v. Gregory, 342 N.C. 580 (1996) (plain error review limits for unobjected trial error; unanimity concerns)
State v. Boyd, 311 N.C. 408 (1984) (prosecutor's closing remarks; substantial evidence can overcome improper argument)
State v. Beck, 359 N.C. 611 (2005) (statutory interpretation; lenity when ambiguous)