State v. Starr
209 N.C. App. 106
| N.C. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Defendant Starr lived in the apartment directly above Lakeisha Cropper; a water leak from his unit prompted Cropper and her boyfriend to call 911.
- Fire Captain Lacewell and firefighters Chadwick, Comer, and Spruill responded to the leak; they knocked on Starr’s door to check on him.
- Defendant shot at the door and then fired toward the firefighters during forced entry, after which Spruill and Chadwick saw him in the kitchen with a pistol.
- Corporal Musacchio entered, ordered Starr to drop the pistol, and arrested him; a .25 handgun was recovered.
- Police recovered spent and unspent shells, a rifle, marijuana, and related items in Starr’s apartment; damage included holes near the door and a water-filled sink plugged with a rag.
- Starr was charged with four counts of assaulting a firefighter with a firearm and one count of assaulting a law enforcement officer; the jury acquitted the LEO count and convicted the four firefighter counts; sentencing consolidated two counts each, then probation imposed.
- Starr challenged the sufficiency of the evidence for three firefighter counts, the jury instruction on assault, and the jury’s review of Spruill’s testimony under 15A-1233; the Court of Appeals addressed each issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was sufficient evidence Starr assaulted three firefighters with a firearm | Starr | Starr contends no assault occurred | Sustained: sufficient evidence supported all three assaults against Comer, Lacewell, and Chadwick. |
| Whether the trial court erred by not instructing on the underlying elements of assault | Starr | Failure to define assault prejudiced him | Overruled: instructions given followed pattern jury instruction; writing the specific definition was not required when not properly tendered in writing. |
| Whether the trial court properly handled the jury’s request to review Spruill’s testimony under 15A-1233 | Starr | Court failed to bring jurors to courtroom and misapplied discretion | No error: court instructed jurors to rely on recollection; discretion properly exercised; waiver by defense counsel’s consent. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Musselwhite, 59 N.C.App. 477 (1982) (no fear required for assault; overt act suffices to show intent to injure)
- State v. Newton, 251 N.C. 151 (1959) (shooting toward another is assault irrespective of aggressor’s intent)
- State v. Ashe, 314 N.C. 28 (1985) (courts may require judge to read evidence when reviewing jury requests under 15A-1233(a))
- State v. Harden, 344 N.C. 542 (1996) (trial court’s discretion to allow jury recollection-based review; requires instruction to rely on memory)
- State v. Barrow, 350 N.C. 640 (1999) (court discretion on whether to allow reading of testimony to jury in open court)