Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Beck

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided July 1, 2005No. 191PA04Published

1DissentJustice Brady

In the instant case, this Court must apply N.C.G.S. § 15A-1340.16(d), which states “[e]violence necessary to prove an element of the offense shall not be used to prove any factor in aggravation, and the same item of evidence shall not be used to prove more than one factor in aggravation.” N.C.G.S. § 1340.16(d) (2003) (emphasis added). The majority would insert language into this unambiguous provision to hold that “the plain meaning of the second clause is that the ‘same “distinct part” of evidence’ shall not be used to prove more than one aggravator.” Because I would leave amendment of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. State v. AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2005
  3. State v. BatesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1998
  4. Nance v. Southern RailwaySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  5. Hill v. . LaneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908

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

Powered by the Exa API