State v. Shackleford

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Shackleford

296 S.E.2d 658, 59 N.C. App. 357, 1982 N.C. App. LEXIS 3111

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedNovember 2, 1982

DocketNo. 828SC393

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 296 S.E.2d 658 (State v. Shackleford) 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. Shackleford, 296 S.E.2d 658, 59 N.C. App. 357, 1982 N.C. App. LEXIS 3111 (N.C. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

HILL, Judge.

In this case, the defendant was not present for jury selection. The case was called on Wednesday afternoon, 4 November 1981. After giving preliminary instructions to the prospective jurors, the court explained defendant’s absence, stating: “Now, Mr. Shackleford, as is apparent, is not in court due to some misinformation that he received from his attorney and from the District Attorney’s office as to when his case was going to be called.” Without comment or objection by defendant’s counsel, the jury was selected. Trial resumed the following morning with defendant present.

In every criminal prosecution, the accused has the right to be present at every stage of the trial, unless he waives the right. State v. Hayes, 291 N.C. 293, 230 S.E. 2d 146 (1976). In non-capital felony cases, only defendant may waive the right. In misdemeanor cases, defendant may, in addition, waive his right through his counsel with the consent of the court. State v. Ferebee, 266 N.C. 606, 146 S.E. 2d 666 (1966).

Here, defendant was charged with felonious larceny and breaking or entering. Although his attorney selected the jury in defendant’s absence, the defendant retained his right to be present. Therefore, defendant is entitled to a

New trial.

Judges Arnold and Johnson concur.

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

HILL, Judge.

In this case, the defendant was not present for jury selection. The case was called on Wednesday afternoon, 4 November 1981. After giving preliminary instructions to the prospective jurors, the court explained defendant’s absence, stating: “Now, Mr. Shackleford, as is apparent, is not in court due to some misinformation that he received from his attorney and from the District Attorney’s office as to when his case was going to be called.” Without comment or objection by defendant’s counsel, the jury was selected. Trial resumed the following morning with defendant present.

In every criminal prosecution, the accused has the right to be present at every stage of the trial, unless he waives the right. State v. Hayes, 291 N.C. 293, 230 S.E. 2d 146 (1976). In non-capital felony cases, only defendant may waive the right. In misdemeanor cases, defendant may, in addition, waive his right through his counsel with the consent of the court. State v. Ferebee, 266 N.C. 606, 146 S.E. 2d 666 (1966).

Here, defendant was charged with felonious larceny and breaking or entering. Although his attorney selected the jury in defendant’s absence, the defendant retained his right to be present. Therefore, defendant is entitled to a

New trial.

Judges Arnold and Johnson concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

296 S.E.2d 658, 59 N.C. App. 357, 1982 N.C. App. LEXIS 3111, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-shackleford-ncctapp-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack