{
  "id": 11915392,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. TONYA BROWN",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Brown",
  "decision_date": "1995-09-19",
  "docket_number": "No. 9319SC968",
  "first_page": "276",
  "last_page": "278",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "120 N.C. App. 276"
    }
  ],
  "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": "346 S.E.2d 145",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1986,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "317 N.C. 340",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        4780363,
        4777906,
        4775193,
        4775389,
        4772575
      ],
      "year": 1986,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/317/0340-02",
        "/nc/317/0340-05",
        "/nc/317/0340-01",
        "/nc/317/0340-03",
        "/nc/317/0340-04"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "341 S.E.2d 603",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1986,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "607"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "80 N.C. App. 95",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8521992
      ],
      "year": 1986,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "101"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/80/0095-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "296 S.E.2d 261",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1982,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "266"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "307 N.C. 79",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8560661
      ],
      "year": 1982,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "85"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/307/0079-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "448 S.E.2d 131",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1994,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "116 N.C. App. 445",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8524532
      ],
      "year": 1994,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/116/0445-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 299,
    "char_count": 4127,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.714,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.0920400424540279e-07,
      "percentile": 0.5658577005840881
    },
    "sha256": "d10dd34c8c145bdd207c2663644b87daec5ec21dc0117bf319f5e2b5f997db8b",
    "simhash": "1:854b543b07ae4c07",
    "word_count": 665
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:17:04.771230+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges EAGLES and LEWIS concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. TONYA BROWN"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "COZORT, Judge.\nDefendant Tonya Brown appeals from a judgment imposing a sentence of life imprisonment for the second degree murder of her husband. On 20 September 1994, we remanded the case to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing on the testimony of Gina Russell, an ex-girlfriend of the victim. Defendant contends the trial court erred in excluding Russell\u2019s testimony about her abusive relationship with defendant\u2019s husband. Defendant contends the evidence would have been relevant to her knowledge of her husband\u2019s history of violence and to her fear of him. After reviewing Russell\u2019s testimony, we find the trial court did not err in refusing to allow Russell to testify before the jury.\nThe facts of this case are set forth in State v. Brown, 116 N.C. App. 445, 448 S.E.2d 131 (1994).\nAt the evidentiary hearing before the trial court on 12 December 1994, Russell testified that she began dating defendant\u2019s husband in 1983 when she was fifteen years old, before he married defendant. Their relationship ended three years later, in 1986, six years before defendant shot her husband. Russell testified that defendant\u2019s husband was \u201cvery violent.\u201d She recounted episodes where he threatened her at knife point, pushed and kicked her, and engaged in other violent behavior. Russell testified she told a friend to \u201cwarn\u201d the defendant about this abuse; however, she did not know whether this friend ever conveyed the message to defendant.\nA defendant claiming self-defense may present evidence of the victim\u2019s character which tends to show (1) the victim was the aggressor, or (2) the defendant had a reasonable apprehension of death or bodily harm, or both. State v. Corn, 307 N.C. 79, 85, 296 S.E.2d 261, 266 (1982).\nN.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 8C-1, Rule 405(b) (1992) provides that specific instances of conduct may be presented as proof of character in cases where a person\u2019s character is an essential element of a charge or defense. In self-defense cases, the victim\u2019s violent character is relevant only as it relates to the reasonableness of defendant\u2019s apprehension and use of force, which are essential elements of self-defense. State v. Shoemaker, 80 N.C. App. 95, 101, 341 S.E.2d 603, 607, motion to dismiss allowed and disc. review denied, 317 N.C. 340, 346 S.E.2d 145 (1986). Thus, the victim\u2019s conduct in his relationship with Russell becomes relevant only if defendant knew about it at the time of the shooting. Id.\nSince Russell\u2019s testimony failed to establish that defendant knew of her husband\u2019s abusive behavior toward his ex-girlfriend, it provides no evidence that the victim\u2019s past violence put the defendant in reasonable apprehension of bodily harm. The trial court was correct in excluding Russell\u2019s testimony.\nDefendant has brought forward several other assignments of error, most of which deal with rulings of the trial court on various evi-dentiary issues. We have reviewed all assignments of error brought forward, and we find the trial court committed no prejudicial errors.\nNo error.\nJudges EAGLES and LEWIS concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "COZORT, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Michael F. Easley, by Special Deputy Attorneys General Daniel F. McLawhom and Thomas F. Moffitt, for the State.",
      "Davis Law Firm, by Robert M. Davis, for defendant appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. TONYA BROWN\nNo. 9319SC968\n(Filed 19 September 1995)\nEvidence and Witnesses \u00a7 285 (NCI4th)\u2014 victim\u2019s past violence \u2014 no showing that defendant knew about violence\u2014 no apprehension of bodily harm \u2014 evidence properly excluded\nIn a prosecution of defendant for the murder of her husband, the trial court did not err in excluding testimony by the husband\u2019s ex-girlfriend concerning his violent and abusive behavior which occurred six years before defendant shot her husband, since such testimony failed to establish that defendant knew of her husband\u2019s abusive behavior toward his ex-girlfriend and that his past violence put her in reasonable apprehension of bodily harm.\nAm Jur 2d, Evidence \u00a7\u00a7 335 et seq.\nAppeal by defendant from judgment entered 2 April 1993 by Judge Russell G. Walker, Jr., in Rowan County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 7 June 1994.\nAttorney General Michael F. Easley, by Special Deputy Attorneys General Daniel F. McLawhom and Thomas F. Moffitt, for the State.\nDavis Law Firm, by Robert M. Davis, for defendant appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0276-01",
  "first_page_order": 310,
  "last_page_order": 312
}