Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Harris

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided October 5, 2004No. COA03-1071Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partLevinson, Judge

I respectfully disagree with the majority opinion’s reasoning and conclusion concerning the application of Rule 412 to the second degree rape conviction. I would find no error in this conviction. I also dissent from the majority’s conclusion that defendant’s conviction for common law robbery should be reversed. I would vote to find no error in the trial of either felony. I concur with the majority’s decision to remand for resentencing in light of Blakely v. Washington, - U.S. -, 159 L. Ed. 2d 403 (2004).

The trial court did not err by excluding evidence of the victim’s sexual activity with her…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. State v. WallaceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991
  3. State v. HerringSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
  4. State v. FortneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  5. Dunn v. CusterCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API