{ "id": 8549050, "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JESSIE EARL FULLERTON", "name_abbreviation": "State v. Fullerton", "decision_date": "1973-05-23", "docket_number": "No. 7314SC339", "first_page": "303", "last_page": "305", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "18 N.C. App. 303" } ], "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": [], "analysis": { "cardinality": 255, "char_count": 4498, "ocr_confidence": 0.512, "pagerank": { "raw": 2.0446031217563963e-07, "percentile": 0.753115915252202 }, "sha256": "4e20c7af544caa00be9bd5c6b41038cfe267bd0e54259cdafc3ce277db99169b", "simhash": "1:26ea80244258286a", "word_count": 725 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:14:36.293491+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [ "Judges Britt and Baley concur." ], "parties": [ "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JESSIE EARL FULLERTON" ], "opinions": [ { "text": "BROCK, Judge.\nDefendant assigns as error the admission of his in-custody confession into evidence. The trial judge conducted a full and fair evidentiary hearing, in the absence of the jury, upon the question of the voluntariness of defendant\u2019s confession. The evidence fully supports the finding and conclusion by the trial judge that defendant\u2019s confession was freely and voluntarily given. When supported by the evidence the trial court\u2019s findings will not be disturbed on appeal. This assignment of error is overruled.\nDefendant assigns as error the denial of his motion for nonsuit. The evidence of defendant\u2019s confession coupled with the evidence of the corpus delicti was sufficient to require submission of the case to the jury and to support its verdict. This assignment of error is overruled.\nDefendant assigns as error that the trial judge permitted defendant, against the advice of counsel, to call defendant\u2019s sister as a defense witness. The trial judge fully and fairly advised the defendant of his right to offer evidence or not offer evidence, and the procedural consequences of either choice. The trial judge further advised the defendant that defense counsel felt it would be for defendant\u2019s best interest that he not offer evidence. In spite of the judge\u2019s explanations, and in spite of the advice of counsel to the contrary, defendant called his sister to testify. Her testimony was sufficient to have convicted defendant. He now complains.\nIn our view, when a defendant proceeds against the advice of his attorney, he will just have to live with the results. This defendant has been accorded every protection to which he is entitled. In any event, the State\u2019s evidence in this case was so clear and overwhelming that the testimony of defendant\u2019s sister was merely cumulative. This assignment of error is overruled.\nWe find no merit in defendant\u2019s exceptions to the answers given by the trial judge to questions asked by the jurors. In our opinion, defendant had a fair trial, free from prejudicial error.\nNo error.\nJudges Britt and Baley concur.", "type": "majority", "author": "BROCK, Judge." } ], "attorneys": [ "Attorney General Morgan by Assistant Attorney General Dew, for the State.", "Arthur Vann for the defendant." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JESSIE EARL FULLERTON\nNo. 7314SC339\n(Filed 23 May 1973)\n1. Criminal Law \u00a7 76\u2014 admission of confession\nThe trial court did not err in the admission of defendant\u2019s in-custody confession where the evidence on voir dire supports the court\u2019s determination that the confession was freely and voluntarily given.\n2. Burglary and Unlawful Breakings \u00a7 5; Larceny \u00a7 7\u2014 confession and corpus delicti \u2014 sufficiency of evidence for jury\nEvidence of defendant\u2019s confession coupled with evidence of the corpus delicti was sufficient to require submission of a felonious breaking and entering and felonious larceny case to the jury.\n3. Constitutional Law \u00a7 32; Criminal Law \u00a7 101\u2014 permitting defendant to offer evidence against advice of counsel\nThe trial court did not err in permitting defendant, against the advice of his counsel, to call defendant\u2019s sister as a defense witness, the court having explained defendant\u2019s right to offer or not offer evidence and the procedural consequences of either choice and having advised defendant that defendant\u2019s counsel thought it would be in his best interest not to offer evidence.\nAppeal by defendant from Bailey, Judge, 2 October 1972 Session of Superior Court held in Durham County.\nDefendant was charged and convicted of (1) , felonious breaking and entering and (2) felonious larceny.\nTwo Durham city police officers went to New Orleans, Louisiana, in July 1971 to return defendant and his brother to North Carolina to stand trial on an armed robbery charge. After his return to North Carolina, defendant fully confessed to the armed robbery charge, and also confessed that he and his brother had committed the felonious breaking and entering and felonious larceny. He took the officers to the site of the break-in, the McPherson residence on Orange-Factory Road, a rural road in Durham County. Defendant showed the officers how the break-in in May 1971 was accomplished, and how they loaded a truck with miscellaneous items taken from the McPherson residence. The State\u2019s evidence further showed that on the weekend of 30 April \u2014 2 May 1971, the McPherson residence on Orange-Factory Road had been broken and entered, and over $4,000.00 worth of personal property had been taken.\nUpon defendant\u2019s plea of not guilty he was tried by jury and found guilty as charged.\nAttorney General Morgan by Assistant Attorney General Dew, for the State.\nArthur Vann for the defendant." }, "file_name": "0303-01", "first_page_order": 327, "last_page_order": 329 }