State v. Renfro
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1DissentElmore, Judge
As to sections II and III of the majority’s opinion, I fully concur. However, because section I stretches Rule 609 beyond its plain language and blurs the distinction between Rule 404(b) and Rule 609, I must dissent from it.
Defendant was indicted for possessing cocaine with an intent to sell, manufacture, or deliver. Defendant stipulated that the substance found by Officer Skewes was indeed cocaine, but contested any evidence of possession. Defendant intended to prove his innocence of the crime charged by testifying that he did not throw anything down while running from Officer Skewes. The…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State v. LloydSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2001
- State v. WilkersonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
- State v. WilkersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2002
- State v. McCoyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
- State v. HairstonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.