Fennell v. N.C. Dept. of Crime Control

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedMarch 3, 2000
DocketI.C. NO. TA-13866.
StatusPublished

This text of Fennell v. N.C. Dept. of Crime Control (Fennell v. N.C. Dept. of Crime Control) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Carolina Industrial Commission primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Fennell v. N.C. Dept. of Crime Control, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2000).

Opinion

The Full Commission has reviewed the prior Decision and Order based upon the entire record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner George T. Glenn, II and the briefs and arguments on appeal. Based upon the assignments of error, the appealing party has shown good ground to reconsider the evidence. This case involves the tragic killing of a young man, as the unexpected and extremely unfortunate result of what appears to have been a questionable stop for speeding five miles over the speed limit. The Full Commission recognizes that numerous inconsistencies exist in the testimony of the witnesses. However, it was plaintiffs' burden to prove negligence on the part of defendant's agent Trooper Stephenson. Having considered the voluminous evidence in this record, the Full Commission finds that plaintiffs failed to sustain their burden of proof and REVERSES the Deputy Commissioner's holding and enters the following Decision and Order.

* * * * * * * * * * *
EVIDENTIARY AND PROCEDURAL RULINGS
_____The objections raised by defendant as to numerous evidentiary and procedural rulings made by the Deputy Commissioner are ruled upon in accordance with the applicable provisions of the law and the Decision and Order in this case.

* * * * * * * * * * *
The Full Commission finds as facts and concludes as matters of law the following, which were entered into by the parties in a Pre-Trial Agreement, as:

STIPULATIONS
1. All the parties are properly before the Industrial Commission, and the Industrial Commission has jurisdiction over the parties and this claim. The parties are subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Tort Claims Act.

2. Norwood F. Fennell and Annie B. Fennell are the duly designated administrators of the estate of their late son, Kenneth B. Fennell.

3. On 30 August 1993, Trooper Richard L. Stephenson shot and killed Kenneth B. Fennell.

4. The issues to be determined by the Full Commission are as follows:

a) Whether Trooper Richard L. Stephenson was negligent in the shooting of Kenneth B. Fennell?

b) If so, what, if any, damages are plaintiffs entitled to recover?

* * * * * * * * * * *
Based upon all of the competent evidence of record, the Full Commission finds as follows:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On 30 August 1993, at approximately 7:05 p.m., Trooper Richard L. Stephenson (hereafter Trooper Stephenson) was on duty on Interstate 85 (hereafter I-85) in Randolph County, North Carolina, near the Guilford County line. On that date, Trooper Stephenson was employed by the North Carolina State Highway Patrol and had been so employed since 11 January 1986.

2. On the date in question, Trooper Stephenson was conducting radar surveillance of vehicular traffic traveling northbound on I-85. His patrol car was stationary in the median beneath the Highway 311 bridge.

3. Trooper Stephenson observed a blue Pontiac Grand Am headed northbound on I-85, and estimated the car was traveling at seventy (70) miles per hour. The speed limit on this portion of I-85 was sixty-five (65) miles per hour. Using his radar, Trooper Stephenson clocked the vehicle which was in fact traveling seventy (70) miles per hour. After verifying the speed of the car, Trooper Stephenson pulled out from his position with the intent to stop the vehicle and to give the driver a warning ticket.

4. Trooper Stephenson caught up with the vehicle and activated his blue light. The vehicle pulled over onto the right shoulder of I-85 and stopped. The motorist exited his vehicle and began walking toward Trooper Stephenson's patrol car before Trooper Stephenson was able to position his car. Trooper Stephenson exited his vehicle and walked up to the motorist, who was an African-American male estimated to be between twenty (20) and thirty (30) years old. The motorist asked why he had been stopped, and Trooper Stephenson indicated he had been stopped for speeding.

5. Trooper Stephenson then asked the motorist to sit in the right front passenger seat of his patrol car. The motorist complied with Trooper Stephenson's request and sat in the patrol car with Trooper Stephenson.

6. Trooper Stephenson asked the motorist for his operator's license and the motorist produced a student ID indicating that his name was Kenneth B. Fennell (hereafter Mr. Fennell). Trooper Stephenson again asked Mr. Fennell for his license, and Mr. Fennell told him that he had a New York operating license and gave it to Trooper Stephenson. Next, Trooper Stephenson contacted dispatch to determine if Mr. Fennell had a valid North Carolina or New York operator's license. Trooper Stephenson was advised that Mr. Fennell did not have a valid North Carolina operator's license and that the information was inconclusive at that time as to whether he had a valid New York license.

7. The vehicle Mr. Fennell was driving was a rental car. When Trooper Stephenson asked how the vehicle had been rented, Mr. Fennell informed Trooper Stephenson that his girlfriend had rented the car and presented the rental agreement.

8. Trooper Stephenson issued Mr. Fennell a citation for not having a valid operator's license. Thereafter, Trooper Stephenson asked Mr. Fennell if he had any illegal drugs, contraband, or weapons in the vehicle. Mr. Fennell said that he did not. Trooper Stephenson then asked if he could search the vehicle and Mr. Fennell verbally consented to the search. Trooper Stephenson had written consent forms in his patrol car that he normally asks motorists to sign, but he did not secure a written consent prior to this search.

9. Before beginning the search, Trooper Stephenson asked Mr. Fennell to pull his car farther off the right side of the highway because the car was too close to the traveled portion of the road. Mr. Fennell pulled his vehicle farther off the right side of the highway and as he left the vehicle, Mr. Fennell opened the trunk.

10. Trooper Stephenson determined that there was no reason to search the trunk and proceeded to search the passenger compartment of the vehicle. Trooper Stephenson first attempted to search the glove compartment, but could not open it. Mr. Fennell then opened the glove compartment. Trooper Stephenson asked Mr. Fennell to stand next to the front right side of the rental car. Next, Trooper Stephenson looked through some items that were on the front seat.

11. Trooper Stephenson then placed his left hand under the front passenger side seat and removed a black bag from under the front seat and began to unzip it. When he had the bag approximately half open, Trooper Stephenson saw the barrel of a gun.

12. When Trooper Stephenson asked Mr. Fennell about the gun, the credible evidence of record indicates that a physical altercation began and that Mr. Fennell struck Trooper Stephenson between the eyes. When Trooper Stephenson was hit, he dropped the black bag and he and Mr. Fennell began to struggle.

13. At some point during the struggle, Trooper Stephenson pulled his convoy and swung it at Mr. Fennell. The convoy did not strike Mr. Fennell and either fell from Trooper Stephenson's hand or was knocked out of his hand. Next, Trooper Stephenson pulled out his mace, but it also was either dropped or knocked out of his hand.

14. Trooper Stephenson then grabbed Mr. Fennell and threw him onto the ground. Trooper Stephenson attempted to gain control of Mr. Fennell by pushing down on Mr. Fennell's throat with his right arm while attempting to maneuver so that Mr.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Sangamo Weston, Inc. v. National Surety Corp.
414 S.E.2d 127 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1992)
Guthrie v. North Carolina State Ports Authority
299 S.E.2d 618 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1983)
State Ex Rel. Tucker v. Frinzi
474 S.E.2d 127 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1996)
Jackson v. N.C. Department of Crime Control & Public Safety
388 S.E.2d 770 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Fennell v. N.C. Dept. of Crime Control, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fennell-v-nc-dept-of-crime-control-ncworkcompcom-2000.