State v. Canady
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
WEBB, Justice.
The defendant argues, under his only assignment of error, that it was error for the court to rely on the statement of the prosecuting attorney in finding the aggravating factor. We believe this argument has merit.
“Under the Fair Sentencing Act, a trial court may not find an aggravating factor where the only evidence to support it is the prosecutor’s mere assertion that the factor exists.” State v. Swimm, 316 N.C. 24, 32, 340 S.E.2d 65, 70-71 (1986); State v. Thompson, 309 N.C. 421, 307 S.E.2d 156 (1983). Pursuant to this rule, the defendant is entitled to a new sentencing…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State v. OliverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. ThompsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. HedrickSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
- State v. SwimmSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
- State v. MullicanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- State v. ThomasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1992
- State v. BursellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2019
- State v. BuchananCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1992
- Reep v. BeckSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2005
- State v. HargettCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.