{
  "id": 8521052,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. GUSTARIVUS WHITAKER",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Whitaker",
  "decision_date": "1991-07-02",
  "docket_number": "No. 9018SC727",
  "first_page": "386",
  "last_page": "388",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "103 N.C. App. 386"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Ct. App.",
    "id": 14983,
    "name": "North Carolina Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "2 ALR4th 330",
      "category": "reporters:specialty",
      "reporter": "A.L.R. 4th",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "337 S.E.2d 786",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1985,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "315 N.C. 1",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        4715685
      ],
      "year": 1985,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/315/0001-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "85 S.E.2d 133",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1954,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "138"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "241 N.C. 226",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8606351
      ],
      "year": 1954,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "232"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/241/0226-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "364 S.E.2d 118",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1988,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "321 N.C. 574",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        2569213
      ],
      "year": 1988,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/321/0574-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "81 S.E.2d 364",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1954,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "240 N.C. 171",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8596105
      ],
      "year": 1954,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/240/0171-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 302,
    "char_count": 4253,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.76,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.841186935332697e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4172449822364161
    },
    "sha256": "5e9dd1578b2c915079b06e1ff05278d072a715047261df7c8a8bd73128385213",
    "simhash": "1:0f6f80eabb7e00b9",
    "word_count": 691
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:27:13.805826+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges EAGLES and WYNN concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. GUSTARIVUS WHITAKER"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PHILLIPS, Judge.\nDefendant was convicted of second degree sexual offense in violation of G.S. 14-27.5(a)(l) and first degree burglary in violation of G.S. 14-51 upon evidence which tends to show that he broke into Susan Farmer\u2019s home located on Elmer Street in Greensboro during the early morning hours of 23 August 1989 and sexually assaulted her. He contends that the court erred to his prejudice in receiving evidence of another crime allegedly committed by him and in charging the jury. The contentions are without merit and we find no error.\nOver defendant\u2019s objection and for the limited purpose of showing his identity, intent and common plan or scheme, the trial court permitted the State to introduce evidence that defendant committed a similar break-in and sexual offense on 21 July 1989. The other residence broken into was about two blocks from Ms. Farmer\u2019s house; both incidents occurred in the early morning hours after the perpetrator entered the residence involved through a window; during the course of each assault the perpetrator repeatedly admonished his victim not to look at him; in one instance the perpetrator \u2019\u25a0\u2018>d vaginal intercourse with the victim and performed cunniline-\u201d^ on her, in the other he stated his intention to rape the victim but had time only to perform cunnilingus before barking dogs frightened him away; both victims correctly described defendant\u2019s physical characteristics and made unequivocal in-court and out-of-court identifications of him. The evidence was admissible under Rule 404(b), N.C. Rules of Evidence, to show intent, identity, common scheme, plan or design, State v. McClain, 240 N.C. 171, 81 S.E.2d 364 (1954), and Rule 403 in that the probative value of the evidence substantially outweighed the danger of unfair prejudice to defendant\u2019s case, State v. Boyd, 321 N.C. 574, 364 S.E.2d 118 (1988), and the court\u2019s charge to the jury correctly stated the limited purpose of the evidence.\nConceding that in instructing the jury the trial court correctly defined reasonable doubt, defendant nevertheless argues that the court erred in failing to include a portion of the definition of reasonable doubt found in State v. Hammonds, 241 N.C. 226, 232, 85 S.E.2d 133, 138 (1954), to the effect that evidence beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that satisfies one to a moral certainty of the truth of the charge. Having adequately charged the jury on reasonable doubt, the court was not required to do more. State v. Avery, 315 N.C. 1, 337 S.E.2d 786 (1985).\nNo error.\nJudges EAGLES and WYNN concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PHILLIPS, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Lacy H. Thornburg, by Assistant Attorney General Lorinzo L. Joyner, for the State.",
      "Assistant Public Defender Frederick G. Lind for defendant appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. GUSTARIVUS WHITAKER\nNo. 9018SC727\n(Filed 2 July 1991)\n1. Rape and Allied Offenses \u00a7 4.1 (NCI3d)\u2014 second degree sexual offense \u2014 similar offense \u2014 admissible\nThe trial court did not err in a prosecution for second degree sexual offense and burglary by admitting evidence that defendant had committed a similar break-in and sexual offense about one month earlier. The evidence was admissible under N.C.G.S. \u00a7 8C-1, Rule 404(b) to show intent, identity, common scheme, plan, or design; the probative value substantially outweighed the danger of unfair prejudice, and the court\u2019s charge to the jury correctly stated the limited purpose of the evidence. N.C.G.S. \u00a7 8C-1, Rule 403.\nAm Jur 2d, Rape \u00a7 71.\nAdmissibility, in rape case, of evidence that accused raped or attempted to rape person other than prosecutrix. 2 ALR4th 330.\n2. Criminal Law \u00a7 750 (NCI4th| \u2014 sexual offense and burglary\u2014 instruction on reasonable doubt \u2014 no error\nThe trial court did not err in a prosecution for second degree sexual offense and burglary in its instruction on reasonable doubt where the court did not instruct the jury that evidence beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that satisfies one to a moral certainty of the charge. Defendant concedes that the court correctly defined reasonable doubt; more was not required.\nAm Jur 2d, Trial \u00a7\u00a7 827, 829-831, 841.\nAPPEAL by defendant from judgments entered 5 March 1990 by Judge Melzer A. Morgan, Jr. in GUILFORD County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 23 January 1991.\nAttorney General Lacy H. Thornburg, by Assistant Attorney General Lorinzo L. Joyner, for the State.\nAssistant Public Defender Frederick G. Lind for defendant appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0386-01",
  "first_page_order": 416,
  "last_page_order": 418
}