Home/Court of Appeals of North Carolina/State v. Penland

State v. Penland

365 S.E.2d 721, 89 N.C. App. 350, 1988 N.C. App. LEXIS 273
CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina
DecidedMarch 15, 1988
Docket8717SC822
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 365 S.E.2d 721 (State v. Penland) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Penland, 365 S.E.2d 721, 89 N.C. App. 350, 1988 N.C. App. LEXIS 273 (N.C. Ct. App. 1988).

Opinion

ARNOLD, Judge.

In his sole assignment of error, defendant contends the trial court erred in considering the habitual felon charge as a separate *351 crime and in sentencing him separately as an habitual felon. We agree.

The only reason for establishing that an accused is an habitual felon is to enhance the punishment which would otherwise be appropriate for the substantive felony which he has allegedly committed while in such a status. State v. Allen, 292 N.C. 431, 233 S.E. 2d 585 (1977). Being an habitual felon is not a crime but is a status. Id. The status itself, standing alone, will not support a criminal sentence. Id. A court may not treat the violation of the Habitual Felon Act as a substantive offense. State v. Thomas, 82 N.C. App. 682, 347 S.E. 2d 494 (1986). Upon a conviction as an habitual felon, the court must sentence the defendant for the underlying felony as a Class C felon. G.S. 14-7.6; State v. Aldridge, 67 N.C. App. 655, 314 S.E. 2d 139 (1984).

In the present case, the trial court erred in sentencing defendant in a separate judgment and commitment as an habitual felon. Defendant is entitled to a new sentencing hearing in which the convictions for assault with a deadly weapon upon a law enforcement officer and being an habitual felon shall be treated as a single Class C felony.

The judgment finding defendant guilty of being an habitual felon is vacated. The judgment finding defendant guilty of assault with a deadly weapon upon a law enforcement officer is remanded for resentencing in accordance with this opinion.

Vacated and remanded for resentencing.

Judges Phillips and Cozort concur.

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

Related

State v. Chisholm
Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2026
State v. Graham
Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2023
State v. Waycaster
818 S.E.2d 189 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2018)
State v. Massey
672 S.E.2d 696 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2009)
State v. Crump
632 S.E.2d 233 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2006)
State v. Bostick
600 S.E.2d 900 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2004)
State v. Burch
585 S.E.2d 461 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2003)
State v. Dammons
583 S.E.2d 606 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2003)
State v. Wilson
533 S.E.2d 865 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2000)
State v. Smith
533 S.E.2d 518 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2000)
State v. Patton
458 S.E.2d 230 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1995)
State v. Harris
444 S.E.2d 226 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
365 S.E.2d 721, 89 N.C. App. 350, 1988 N.C. App. LEXIS 273, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-penland-ncctapp-1988.