The opinion
Justice WEBB
dissenting.
I dissent. I do not believe this case can be distinguished from State v. Chapman, 293 N.C. 585 , 238 S.E. 2d 784 (1977). Unless we are willing to overrule Chapman , which I favor, I do not believe we should hold there is sufficient evidence to convict the defendant in this case. In Chapman , the defendant was positively identified as being at the scene at the time the victim was shot. The defendant had a motive for shooting the victim. A spent shell from the defendant’s shotgun was found in the area from which the victim was shot and shortly after the victim was shot the defendant’s shotgun had recently been fired. This Court held the evidence was not sufficient to convict the defendant.
In this case there was evidence that defendant had a motive to shoot the victim and the defendant threatened the victim. There was evidence from which the jury could conclude the defendant was in the area when the victim was shot. The evidence was inconclusive as to whether the defendant had recently fired a gun. The majority has held this is substantial evidence of every element of the crime. I would agree with the majority if there were no Chapman . It seems to me the evidence in this case is as close to the evidence in Chapman as it could be on the salient features of the case. I believe Chapman should be overruled. If we are not to overrule Chapman , I believe we should say there is not sufficient evidence to convict the defendant in this case.