concluding in a case in which police had control of the crime scene, which was an apartment, that it was a denial of fundamental fairness and due process for the defendant to be denied the limited inspection of the crime scene that he had requested, particularly given that the state had been given access to the scene and had relied heavily on information gained therefrom in prosecuting the defendant
How later courts described this case
- concluding in a case in which police had control of the crime scene, which was an apartment, that it was a denial of fundamental fairness and due process for the defendant to be denied the limited inspection of the crime scene that he had requested, particularly given that the state had been given access to the scene and had relied heavily on information gained therefrom in prosecuting the defendant
- concluding that it was a denial of fundamental fairness and due process for the defendant to be denied the limited inspection of the premises of the crime scene that he had requested, particularly when the state had been given access to the scene and had relied heavily on information gained therefrom in prosecuting the defendant
- noting that "G.S. 15A-925 does not authorize a trial court to order the State to disclose its aggravating circumstances prior to trial" because "aggravating circumstances are not `factual information' within the meaning of G.S. 15A-925"
- holding that when the defendant is convicted of felony murder, the underlying felony merges with the murder and cannot be used as an aggravating circumstance
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Justice EXUM
dissenting as to sentence.
For the reasons stated in Part I of my dissenting opinion in State v. Pinch, 306 N.C. at 38, 292 S.E. 2d at 230 (1982), I believe it was prejudicial error for the trial judge to instruct the jury that it had a duty to recommend the death sentence if it answered certain issues favorably to the state.
Therefore I vote to vacate the death sentence and to remand for a new sentencing hearing. I concur with the result reached by the majority in the guilt phase of the case.