State v. Jacobs

301 S.E.2d 429, 61 N.C. App. 610, 1983 N.C. App. LEXIS 2705
Court of Appeals of North Carolina·Decided April 5, 1983·No. 825SC910·Published·Cited by 19 cases

Opinion

HEDRICK, Judge.

Defendant first contends that judgment should be arrested because an assault with his fists does not satisfy the “deadly weapon” element of the indictment. A deadly weapon is “any article, instrument or substance which is likely to produce death or great bodily harm.” State v. Sturdivant, 304 N.C. 293, 301, 283 S.E. 2d 719, 725 (1981) (citations omitted). The defendant, a thirty-nine year old male who weighed two hundred ten pounds, hit the victim, a sixty year old woman, in the head and stomach. Brain hemorrhages and other injuries resulted from the beating, causing the victim to be unable to care for herself. The defendant’s fists could have been a deadly weapon given the manner in which they were used and the relative size and condition of the parties. See State v. Joyner, 295 N.C. 55, 243 S.E. 2d 367 (1978); State v. Archbell 139 N.C. 537, 51 S.E. 801 (1905).

Since defendant’s fists could have been a deadly weapon in the circumstances of this assault, the indictment was sufficient. The indictment specifically stated that defendant used his fists as a deadly weapon and gave facts demonstrating their deadly character. The Supreme Court of North Carolina in State v. Palmer, 293 N.C. 633, 639-640, 239 S.E. 2d 406, 411 (1977) has noted that,

it is sufficient for indictments or warrants seeking to charge a crime in which one of the elements is the use of a deadly weapon (1) to name the weapon and (2) either to state expressly that the weapon used was a ‘deadly weapon’ or to allege such facts as would necessarily demonstrate the deadly character of the weapon. (Emphasis in original.)

*612 Next, defendant contends that the trial court erred in instructing the jury to consider lesser included offenses after acquitting defendant of assault with a deadly weapon, inflicting serious injury. The jury instruction was not ideal, but it could not have coerced the jury into returning a verdict of guilty on the greater offense. A judge may direct the jury to decide upon lesser included offenses only after finding defendant not guilty on the charged offense. State v. Wilkins, 34 N.C. App. 392, 399-400, 238 S.E. 2d 659, 664-665 (1977).

The defendant had a fair trial free from prejudicial error.

No error.

Judges Whichard and Braswell concur.

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

State v. Jacobs, 301 S.E.2d 429, 61 N.C. App. 610, 1983 N.C. App. LEXIS 2705 (N.C. Ct. App. 1983).

301 S.E.2d 429 (State v. Jacobs) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Steen
Supreme Court of North Carolina, 2020
State v. Steen
826 S.E.2d 478 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2019)
State v. LALIBERTE
687 S.E.2d 318 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2009)
State v. Wallace
676 S.E.2d 922 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2009)
State v. Harris
657 S.E.2d 701 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2008)
State v. Mintz
654 S.E.2d 833 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2008)
State v. Adams
654 S.E.2d 711 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2007)
State v. Brunson
636 S.E.2d 202 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2006)
State v. Lawson
619 S.E.2d 410 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2005)
State v. Yarrell
616 S.E.2d 258 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2005)
State v. Hunt
569 S.E.2d 709 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2002)
State v. Rogers
569 S.E.2d 657 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2002)
State v. Krider
530 S.E.2d 569 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2000)
State v. Bunning
450 S.E.2d 462 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1994)
State v. Grumbles
411 S.E.2d 407 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1991)
State v. Shubert
402 S.E.2d 642 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1991)
State v. Gordon
778 P.2d 1204 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1989)