{ "id": 9250738, "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ERIC STEPHEN BLYMYER", "name_abbreviation": "State v. Blymyer", "decision_date": "2002-10-15", "docket_number": "No. COA01-1487", "first_page": "516", "last_page": "519", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "153 N.C. App. 516" } ], "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": "355 S.E.2d 232", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "weight": 2, "year": 1987, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "236" } ], "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "85 N.C. App. 558", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C. App.", "case_ids": [ 12170162 ], "year": 1987, "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc-app/85/0558-01" ] }, { "cite": "189 S.E.2d 145", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "year": 1972, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "150" } ], "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "281 N.C. 447", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8575301 ], "year": 1972, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "455" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/281/0447-01" ] }, { "cite": "505 S.E.2d 138", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "year": 1998, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "141" } ], "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "130 N.C. App. 675", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C. App.", "case_ids": [ 11469961 ], "year": 1998, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "679" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc-app/130/0675-01" ] }, { "cite": "393 S.E.2d 781", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "year": 1990, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "787" } ], "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "327 N.C. 162", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 2496850 ], "year": 1990, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "171" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/327/0162-01" ] }, { "cite": "393 S.E.2d 811", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "year": 1990, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "814" } ], "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "327 N.C. 210", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 2498848 ], "year": 1990, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "215" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/327/0210-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 473, "char_count": 7979, "ocr_confidence": 0.769, "pagerank": { "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08, "percentile": 0.2159145185684571 }, "sha256": "4b16c1ca099967d9bc5b2a339064f836f7ba84c424c0e0a5787312ac7a5dd318", "simhash": "1:842f80e6dafd14bc", "word_count": 1314 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:17:05.865609+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [ "Chief Judge EAGLES and Judge MARTIN concur." ], "parties": [ "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ERIC STEPHEN BLYMYER" ], "opinions": [ { "text": "THOMAS, Judge.\nDefendant, Eric Stephen Blymyer, was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury. He was sentenced to a term of 108 to 132 months imprisonment.\nDefendant appeals, contending the State failed to present substantial evidence of intent to kill. Based on the reasons herein, we find no error.\nThe State\u2019s evidence tends to show defendant visited the home of Richard Lee Ronquest at approximately 11:30 p.m. on Christmas Eve, 1999. Ronquest, Martha Clodfelter, who is Ronquest\u2019s sister, and Valerie Furman were all present.\nAccording to Ronquest, problems started between defendant and him when defendant spoke disrespectfully to Furman. Ronquest told defendant to \u201cchill out\u201d after defendant cursed at Furman. Defendant cursed again and threw a full, open can of beer on the floor. When defendant refused to clean it up, Ronquest cursed in telling him to leave. The two men then briefly fought, wrestling on the floor, with defendant eventually agreeing to leave.\nDefendant left but shortly returned to Ronquest\u2019s home. The two scuffled and exchanged words a second time. Ronquest shoved defendant into the hamper, held him down, and told him that unless he agreed to leave he would not be let up. Defendant agreed, Ronquest let him up, and defendant walked onto the porch \u201ccussing and carrying on real loud.\u201d Ronquest also walked outside. While standing in the doorway of his truck, defendant \u201cflipped off\u2019 Ronquest.\nRonquest then stepped from the porch to an area underneath a canopy in front of his home. Defendant jumped in the truck and locked the door. He revved the engine, with Ronquest telling him, \u201cJust go, Just go.\u201d As defendant began to back out of the driveway, Ronquest turned to walk inside. Suddenly, Ronquest heard roaring tires spinning in the gravel and turned to see two headlights coming toward him.\nDefendant drove directly at Ronquest, striking him with the truck. With Ronquest pinned against the mobile home and telling defendant to get the truck off of him, defendant pumped the clutch a couple of times and stated, \u201cHow\u2019s that feel, you son of a bitch.\u201d After defendant finally drove away, Ronquest dragged himself to the porch and collapsed.\nAs a result, Ronquest suffered multiple pelvic fractures and other internal injuries. He underwent approximately twenty surgeries.\nDr. Wayne Cline, Jr., an expert in urology, testified he examined Ronquest after the incident and that Ronquest\u2019s pelvic fractures resulted from significant force caused by a high speed impact or being crushed against an immovable object.\nEddie Christopher Howard, a deputy with the Rowan County Sheriffs Department, went to defendant\u2019s residence shortly after the incident and discovered defendant fighting with his two brothers. Howard broke up the fight. According to Howard, defendant appeared agitated and was using profane language. Defendant also had a strong odor of alcohol.\nHoward testified defendant made several spontaneous utterances, including, \u201cI guess the next time I\u2019ll just have to stab his ass in the neck and kill him next time,\u201d and \u201cI guess I\u2019ll just have to stab him, stab him next time.\u201d\nDefendant did not present any evidence.\nDefendant contends the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss at the close of the State\u2019s evidence and at the close of all the evidence. Specifically, defendant argues the State failed to present substantial evidence that he intended to kill Ronquest. He asks this Court to set aside his conviction and enter judgment on the lesser included offense of assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury. We disagree with defendant\u2019s contention.\nA motion to dismiss is properly denied if \u201cthere is substantial evidence (1) of each essential element of the offense charged and (2) that defendant is the perpetrator of the offense.\u201d State v. Lynch, 327 N.C. 210, 215, 393 S.E.2d 811, 814 (1990). \u201cSubstantial evidence is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.\u201d State v. Franklin, 327 N.C. 162, 171, 393 S.E.2d 781, 787 (1990). \u201cWhen ruling on a motion to dismiss, all of the evidence should be considered in the light most favorable to the State, and the State is entitled to all reasonable inferences which may be drawn from the evidence.\u201d State v. Davis, 130 N.C. App. 675, 679, 505 S.E.2d 138, 141 (1998). The dispositive issue here is whether the State presented substantial evidence that defendant intended to kill Ronquest.\n\u201cAn intent to kill may be inferred from the nature of the assault, the manner in which it was made, the conduct of the parties, and other relevant circumstances.\u201d State v. Thacker, 281 N.C. 447, 455, 189 S.E.2d 145, 150 (1972).\nIn State v. Hinson, 85 N.C. App. 558, 355 S.E.2d 232 (1987), this court addressed the issue of whether the evidence was sufficient to support an intent to kill where the alleged deadly weapon was a motor vehicle. In Hinson, the defendant drove a truck toward a road where five sheriffs deputies were standing, waved one arm out the window, and screamed, \u201cStand right there, you son of a bitches. I\u2019ll kill you.\u201d He drove the truck straight at the deputies before colliding with two automobiles and running into a ditch. This Court held that such evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the State, raised a reasonable inference that defendant acted with the requisite specific intent to kill the deputies. Id. at 565, 355 S.E.2d at 236.\nHere, the State\u2019s evidence tends to show defendant had been involved in two altercations with Ronquest in Ronquest\u2019s home on the night in question. He had been instructed both times to leave. Prior to getting into his truck after the second incident, defendant \u201cflipped off\u2019 Ronquest. Defendant then drove the truck directly at Ronquest. After pinning him against the mobile home, defendant pumped the clutch a couple of times and said, \u201cHow\u2019s that feel, you son of a bitch.\u201d Following the incident, defendant stated, \u201cI guess the next time I\u2019ll just have to stab his ass in the neck and kill him next time,\u201d and \u201cI guess I\u2019ll just have to stab him, stab him next time.\u201d We find this evidence sufficiently similar to the evidence presented in Hinson to mandate a similar conclusion.\nWe further note that Ronquest\u2019s injuries were life-threatening. He suffered internal injuries to his organs, as well as bone fractures, and had to undergo approximately twenty surgeries.\nViewed in the light most favorable to the State, this evidence raises a reasonable inference that defendant acted with the requisite intent to kill Ronquest. Accordingly, the trial court did not err in denying defendant\u2019s motions to dismiss and allowing the issue to be submitted to the jury.\nNo error.\nChief Judge EAGLES and Judge MARTIN concur.", "type": "majority", "author": "THOMAS, Judge." } ], "attorneys": [ "Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Thomas B. Wood, for the State.", "J. Clark Fischer for defendant-appellant." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ERIC STEPHEN BLYMYER\nNo. COA01-1487\n(Filed 15 October 2002)\nAssault\u2014 deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury \u2014 sufficiency of evidence\nThe trial court did not err by denying defendant\u2019s motion to dismiss a charge of assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury where the evidence tended to show that defendant had been involved in two altercations with the victim in the victim\u2019s home on the night in question; defendant was instructed both times to leave; defendant \u201cflipped off\u201d the victim and drove his truck directly at the victim; after he pinned the victim against a mobile home, defendant pumped the clutch a couple of times and asked how it felt; defendant said after the incident that next time he would have to stab the victim and kill him; and the victim suffered life-threatening injuries and underwent twenty surgeries.\nAppeal by defendant from judgment entered 8 August 2001 by Judge Michael E. Beale in Rowan County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 17 September 2002.\nAttorney General Roy Cooper, by Thomas B. Wood, for the State.\nJ. Clark Fischer for defendant-appellant." }, "file_name": "0516-01", "first_page_order": 546, "last_page_order": 549 }