{ "id": 4221455, "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. WILLIAM CURTIS LOWERY", "name_abbreviation": "State v. Lowery", "decision_date": "2013-07-02", "docket_number": "No. COA12-1129", "first_page": "229", "last_page": "234", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "228 N.C. App. 229" } ], "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": "654 S.E.2d 760", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "case_ids": [ 12640075 ], "weight": 2, "year": 2008, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "764" }, { "page": "764" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/se2d/654/0760-01" ] }, { "cite": "643 S.E.2d 637", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "case_ids": [ 12638137 ], "weight": 2, "year": 2007, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "642" }, { "page": "642" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/se2d/643/0637-01" ] }, { "cite": "650 S.E.2d 29", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "case_ids": [ 12639310 ], "year": 2007, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "33", "parenthetical": "citations and quotations omitted" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/se2d/650/0029-01" ] }, { "cite": "N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-32", "category": "laws:leg_statute", "reporter": "N.C. Gen. Stat.", "pin_cites": [ { "parenthetical": "Felonious assault with deadly weapon with intent to kill or inflicting serious injury" } ], "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-17", "category": "laws:leg_statute", "reporter": "N.C. Gen. Stat.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "539 S.E.2d 25", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "year": 2000, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "28", "parenthetical": "stating elements for attempted first-degree murder (pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-17)" } ], "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "141 N.C. App. 115", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C. App.", "case_ids": [ 9440051 ], "year": 2000, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "117", "parenthetical": "stating elements for attempted first-degree murder (pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-17)" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc-app/141/0115-01" ] }, { "cite": "689 S.E.2d 412", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "year": 2009, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "416", "parenthetical": "citing N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-32.4(b)" } ], "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "201 N.C. App. 161", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C. App.", "case_ids": [ 4173140 ], "year": 2009, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "170", "parenthetical": "citing N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-32.4(b)" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc-app/201/0161-01" ] }, { "cite": "436 S.E.2d 122", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.2d", "weight": 2, "year": 1993, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "124" }, { "parenthetical": "citations omitted" } ], "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "335 N.C. 133", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 2527406 ], "year": 1993, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "136" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/335/0133-01" ] }, { "cite": "188 N.C. App. 152", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C. App.", "case_ids": [ 4155448 ], "weight": 2, "year": 2008, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "157" }, { "page": "157" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc-app/188/0152-01" ] }, { "cite": "183 N.C. App. 36", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C. App.", "case_ids": [ 8201435 ], "weight": 2, "year": 2007, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "43" }, { "page": "43" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc-app/183/0036-01" ] }, { "cite": "N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-32.4", "category": "laws:leg_statute", "reporter": "N.C. Gen. Stat.", "weight": 5, "year": 2011, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "(b)" }, { "page": "(b)" }, { "page": "(b)" }, { "page": "(a)", "parenthetical": "Assault inflicting serious bodily injury" }, { "page": "(b)" } ], "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "186 N.C. App. 57", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C. App.", "case_ids": [ 8154614 ], "year": 2007, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "62", "parenthetical": "citations and quotations omitted" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc-app/186/0057-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 622, "char_count": 12356, "ocr_confidence": 0.731, "pagerank": { "raw": 4.856319230494445e-08, "percentile": 0.30536394206766493 }, "sha256": "17bda76ef92e9425bc05d73049c791a8e7243551b6ed1b1245fca03b4bd6e7f9", "simhash": "1:2b26617cd02f86f7", "word_count": 1983 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:18:27.138557+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [ "Judges HUNTER, JR., Robert N., and McCULLOUGH concur." ], "parties": [ "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. WILLIAM CURTIS LOWERY" ], "opinions": [ { "text": "BRYANT, Judge.\nWhere there was sufficient evidence to allow a reasonable juror to find Defendant guilty of assault inflicting physical injury by strangulation, we hold the trial court did not err in failing to grant Defendant\u2019s motion to dismiss.\nOn 12 September 2011, defendant was indicted on charges of assault by strangulation, assault on a female, habitual misdemeanor assault, and attaining habitual felon status. The matters came on for trial on 13 February 2012 during the Criminal Session of Forsyth County Superior Court, the Honorable Richard L. Doughton, Judge presiding.\nThe State\u2019s evidence tended to show the following. William Curtis Lowry (\u201cDefendant\u201d) met Erica Jacks (\u201cMs. Jacks\u201d) at Forsyth Technical Community College. Ms. Jacks testified that, while not dating, Defendant had stayed with her a few nights.\nOn 30 July 2011, defendant was visiting Ms. Jacks in an apartment that Ms. Jacks shared with her mother at Burke Ridge Apartments on Griffith Road, in Winston-Salem. At about six o\u2019clock in the evening, after a few hours of arguing with defendant, Ms. Jacks stepped outside of the apartment to talk on her cell phone. Defendant followed Ms. Jacks outside and said, \u201cYou\u2019re always trying to sleep around with somebody. You\u2019re always talking to people on the phone.\u201d Ms. Jacks told Defendant to get his things and leave.\nMs. Jacks headed for a storage building located in the apartment complex. Ms. Jacks felt a push from behind her and upon turning around, realized Defendant had followed her to the storage unit. Ms. Jacks testified that Defendant then got on top of her and began to push and hit her around her face. Defendant then proceeded to strangle her. Ms. Jacks testified that she \u201ccouldn\u2019t breathe for a while[.]\u201d When the pressure lessened, she flipped Defendant off of her. Ms. Jacks ran towards her mother\u2019s apartment, screaming, but tripped and fell about a foot away from the door. Ms. Jacks testified that when she tried to get up, Defendant shoved her back down, bit her, hit her in the face several more times, and again strangled her with his hands and attempted to drag her into the apartment. Ms. Jacks felt like she was losing consciousness and called out to a man walking nearby, asking him to call 911.\nOfficer B.R. Anderson of the Winston-Salem Police Department testified that when he arrived, Ms. Jacks was lying on the ground, in a fetal position in front of an apartment. Officer Anderson testified that Ms. Jacks was crying; she was veiy upset; she vomited blood and stomach acid twice; and she was having panic attacks. Officer Anderson testified that Ms. Jack\u2019s clothing was ripped, her face was swollen and bruised, she had scratch marks on her, bruises on her body, and a bite mark on her shoulder.\nMs. Jacks was transported by ambulance to the emergency department at Forsyth Medical Center. There, Ms. Jacks was treated by Sarah Santiago, a physician\u2019s assistant. At trial, Santiago testified to her observation of Ms. Jacks: multiple abrasions, swelling to her face and neck, and \u201cEcchymosis, which is bruising, the purplish color... over her collarbone areas.\u201d Several photographs depicting the injuries to Ms. Jacks\u2019 face and neck were used by Santiago during her testimony. Santiago also identified a human bite mark on Ms. Jacks\u2019 left scapula, the area of her shoulder blade. During the course of her testimony, Santiago was tendered and accepted as an expert \u201cin the area of diagnosing patients, assault victims, in terms of the possibility of strangulation.\u201d When asked whether based upon a review of Ms. Jacks statement, the examination of Ms. Jacks\u2019 neck area, Santiago could make a determination as to whether her injuries were consistent -with strangulation, Santiago testified as follows:\nHer injuries certainly were consistent with the story that she told me. Again, the ecchymosis, the purplish color, was along the clavicular area, which is the collarbone. Then she had the swelling and the abrasions to both sides of the neck. There is also a scratch on the back of the neck, although most of the injuries were to the anterior neck, which is the front of the neck.\nOn cross-examination, Santiago confirmed that the physical injuries sometimes seen after extreme cases of strangulation, such as damage to the hyoid bone or petechiae (the rupture of small blood vessels in the eyes), were not present in Ms. Jacks. Santiago testified that there is a continuum of varying degrees of choking and strangulation, wherein a victim could have \u201cjust the soft tissue swelling to the neck, all the way to, again, near death and serious damage to the trachea and esophagus.\u201d\nDefendant made a motion to dismiss all charges at the close of the State\u2019s evidence, which was denied. Defendant rested -without putting on any evidence and renewed his motion to dismiss. The motion was again denied. The jury found Defendant guilty of habitual misdemeanor assault, assault inflicting physical injury by strangulation, and attaining habitual felon status. Defendant appeals.\nDefendant\u2019s sole issue on appeal is whether the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the State, was insufficient to permit a reasonable juror to find Defendant guilty of assault inflicting physical injury by strangulation.\nWhen ruling on a defendant\u2019s motion to dismiss, the trial court must determine whether there is substantial evidence (1) of each essential element of the offense charged, and (2) that the defendant is the perpetrator of the offense. Substantial evidence is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. This Court reviews the trial court\u2019s denial of a motion to dismiss de novo.\nState v. Smith, 186 N.C. App. 57, 62, 650 S.E.2d 29, 33 (2007) (citations and quotations omitted).\nThe North Carolina General Statutes, regarding assault by strangulation, reads \u201cany person who assaults another person and inflicts physical injury by strangulation is guilty of a Class H felony.\u201d N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-32.4(b) (2011). This Court, in State v. Braxton, held that \u201cevidence that defendant applied sufficient pressure to [the victim\u2019s] throat such that she had difficulty breathing,\u201d was sufficient to constitute strangulation under the statute. 183 N.C. App. 36, 43, 643 S.E.2d 637, 642 (2007). This Court in State v. Little noted that \u201ccuts and bruises on [the victim\u2019s] neck\u201d confirmed by photographic evidence was sufficient evidence to fulfill the physical injury element of assault by strangulation. 188 N.C. App. 152, 157, 654 S.E.2d 760, 764 (2008).\nDefendant concedes that in this case there was sufficient evidence to prove strangulation. However, Defendant contends that the State failed to show that the act of strangulation, rather than the other forms of battery inflicted upon Ms. Jacks, caused her physical injuries. While Ms. Jacks did not testify that the bruising and redness on her neck were the result of the strangulation in particular, Ms. Jacks did testify that the injuries she received were the result of the assault that she described. Ms. Jacks further testified that during the assault, Defendant had strangled her twice, once in the area of the storage unit and again near her apartment door. Santiago, admitted as an expert in the diagnosis of assault victims, \u201cin terms of the possibility of strangulation\u201d testified that\n[Ms. Jacks\u2019] injuries certainly were consistent with the story that she told me. Again, the ecchymosis, the purplish color, was along the clavicular area, which is the collarbone. Then she had the swelling and the abrasions to both sides of the neck....\nQ. You\u2019re saying that would be consistent with force being applied to her neck?\nA. Yes, sir.\nThe testimony by Ms. Jacks and the testimony by Ms. Santiago along with the photographic evidence depicting the bruising, abrasions, and bite mark on and around the neck of Ms. Jacks provide evidence sufficient for the finder of fact to determine that the act of strangulation caused the physical injuries to Ms. Jacks\u2019 neck.\nDefendant next contends that N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-32.4(b) should be interpreted to require proof of physical injury beyond what is inherently caused by every act of strangulation. \u201cIn interpreting a statute, it is presumed the General Assembly intended the words it used to have the meaning they have in ordinary speech.\u201d Nelson v. Battle Forest Friends Meeting, 335 N.C. 133, 136, 436 S.E.2d 122, 124 (1993). \u201cWhen the plain meaning of a word is unambiguous, a court is to go no further in interpreting the statute.\u201d Id. (citations omitted). Here, the elements of assault by strangulation require proof that one: \u201c(1) assaults another person (2) and inflicts physical injury (3) by strangulation.\u201d State v. Williams, 201 N.C. App. 161, 170, 689 S.E.2d 412, 416 (2009) (citing N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-32.4(b)). In Little, where the victim was also sexually assaulted, our Court rejected the defendant\u2019s challenge to his strangulation conviction; our Court observed that the cuts and bruises on the victim\u2019s neck and strangulation during the assault which caused difficulty breathing, were deemed to be \u201csufficient evidence of each essential element of assault by strangulation.\u201d Little, 188 N.C. App. at 157, 654 S.E.2d at 764. Therefore, we reject defendant contention in the instant case.\nFurther, if Defendant\u2019s next assertion, that extensive physical injury should be a requirement for assault by strangulation, had merit, \u201cthe State would be required to show that a defendant strangled his or her victim to the point of death or close to it, in order to prove assault by strangulation. This type of conduct is provided for by other criminal offenses in our State\u2019s statutes.\u201d Braxton, 183 N.C. App. at 43, 643 S.E.2d at 642; see e.g., State v. Peoples, 141 N.C. App. 115, 117, 539 S.E.2d 25, 28 (2000) (stating elements for attempted first-degree murder (pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-17)); N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-32 (Felonious assault with deadly weapon with intent to kill or inflicting serious injury); N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-32.4(a) (Assault inflicting serious bodily injury) (2011). Therefore, interpreting N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-32.4(b) to require extensive physical injuries would frustrate the purpose of the General Assembly in enacting this provision.\nViewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, there was sufficient evidence from which a jury could conclude that the act of strangulation caused Ms. Jacks\u2019 physical injuries. The evidence was sufficient to permit a reasonable juror to find Defendant guilty of assault by strangulation. Therefore, the trial court properly denied Defendant\u2019s motion to dismiss. Accordingly, Defendant\u2019s argument is overruled.\nNo error.\nJudges HUNTER, JR., Robert N., and McCULLOUGH concur.", "type": "majority", "author": "BRYANT, Judge." } ], "attorneys": [ "Attorney GeneralRoy A. Cooper, III, by Assistant Attorney General Tammy A. Bouchelle, for the State.", "Glover & Peterson, P.A., by James R. Glover, for defendant-appellant." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. WILLIAM CURTIS LOWERY\nNo. COA12-1129\nFiled 2 July 2013\n1. Assault \u2014 by strangulation \u2014 evidence sufficient\nThere was sufficient evidence to permit a reasonable juror to find defendant guilty of assault inflicting physical injury by strangulation where defendant conceded strangulation but contended that the State failed to show that the strangulation caused the injuries rather than the other forms of battery inflicted on the victim. The victim\u2019s testimony, testimony from a physician\u2019s assistant who treated the victim in the emergency room and who was accepted as an expert, and photographs of the victim\u2019s injuries provided sufficient evidence to determine that strangulation caused the victim\u2019s injuries.\n2. Assault \u2014 by strangulation \u2014 elements\u2014extensive injury not required\nN.C.G.S. \u00a7 14-32.4(b) (assault by strangulation) does not require proof of physical injury beyond what is inherently caused by every act of strangulation. The elements of the offense are an assault inflicting physical injury by strangulation; the General Assembly is presumed to have intended its words to have their ordinary meaning. Requiring extensive physical injuries would frustrate the purpose of the General Assembly.\nAppeal by defendant from judgment entered 15 February 2012 by Judge Richard L. Doughton in Forsyth County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 27 March 2013.\nAttorney GeneralRoy A. Cooper, III, by Assistant Attorney General Tammy A. Bouchelle, for the State.\nGlover & Peterson, P.A., by James R. Glover, for defendant-appellant." }, "file_name": "0229-01", "first_page_order": 239, "last_page_order": 244 }