{
  "id": 8523191,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. HORACE LEON COVEL",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Covel",
  "decision_date": "1984-09-18",
  "docket_number": "No. 832SC1125",
  "first_page": "490",
  "last_page": "492",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "70 N.C. App. 490"
    }
  ],
  "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": 266,
    "char_count": 3874,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.806,
    "sha256": "d7f0f7460b3f751e3c006795ea60031b08d347f57d8fbc751fcafe7502240792",
    "simhash": "1:a3dec7d94863b08d",
    "word_count": 613
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:14:59.534868+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges Webb and Johnson concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. HORACE LEON COVEL"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PHILLIPS, Judge.\nThe only question presented by this appeal that requires discussion is whether the prison sentences imposed violate the Fair Sentencing Act. We hold that they do not and affirm the judgment entered.\nPreliminary to imposing sentence, the court found two factors in aggravation not specifically listed in G.S. 15A-1340.4(a)(l). One was that the defendant raped the victim of the rape and kidnapping in this case nine years earlier when she was sixteen years old, and the other was that the offenses involved were committed while defendant was on parole. The statute authorizes a sentencing judge to \u201cconsider any aggravating and mitigating factors that he finds are proved by the preponderance of the evidence, and that are reasonably related to the purposes of sentencing, whether or not such aggravating or mitigating factors are set forth herein.\u201d The factual basis for both factors was established by evidence that was not contradicted. The ultimate question, therefore, is whether the factors so found are \u201creasonably related to the purposes of sentencing,\u201d two of which, under G.S. 15A-1340.3, are \u201cto impose a punishment commensurate with the injury the offense has caused, taking into account factors that may diminish or increase the offender\u2019s culpability,\u201d and \u201cto protect the public by restraining offenders.\u201d\nOne of the statutory factors in aggravation deemed by the General Assembly to be reasonably related to the purposes of sentencing is that the offense was committed while the defendant was on pretrial release from another felony charge. G.S. 15A-1340.4(a)(l)(k). That an offense was committed while on parole is equally related to the purpose of sentencing, it seems to us, since in each instance a continuing commitment to crime is indicated, which the public needs to be protected against. And that nine years earlier defendant had terrorized and violated the very same complaining witness in much the same manner greatly increased both the injury that defendant inflicted and his culpability. Again imposing himself on the girl, while holding a knife at her throat, after escaping prosecution the first time, also indicates a cruel and vicious disregard for consequences that the public needs protection against. Thus, it seems quite clear to us that both factors found by the court were \u201creasonably related to the purposes of sentencing.\u201d\nAffirmed.\nJudges Webb and Johnson concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PHILLIPS, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Edmisten, by Assistant Attorney General Nonnie F. Midgette, for the State.",
      "Stephen A. Graves for defendant appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. HORACE LEON COVEL\nNo. 832SC1125\n(Filed 18 September 1984)\nCriminal Law \u00a7 138.7\u2014 sentencing \u2014 aggravating factors \u2014 previous rape of victim \u2014defendant on parole\nIn a rape and kidnapping case the trial court properly found as aggravating factors that defendant raped the victim in this case nine years earlier and that he committed these offenses while on parole, and the court could properly consider these factors in determining defendant\u2019s sentence, since they were reasonably related to the purposes of sentencing.\nAPPEAL by defendant from Allsbrook, Judge. Judgment entered 13 May 1983 in Superior Court, Beaufort County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 21 August 1984.\nDefendant was charged with first degree kidnapping in violation of G.S. 14-39 and first degree rape in violation of G.S. 14-27.2. As the result of a plea bargain under which it was agreed that the prison sentences imposed would run concurrently, defendant pled no contest to second degree kidnapping and second degree rape. The State\u2019s evidence tended to show that defendant was guilty of both charges and the court sentenced him to concurrent terms of fifteen years and thirty-five years respectively, whereas the presumptive term for second degree kidnapping is nine years and for second degree rape is fifteen years.\nAttorney General Edmisten, by Assistant Attorney General Nonnie F. Midgette, for the State.\nStephen A. Graves for defendant appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0490-01",
  "first_page_order": 522,
  "last_page_order": 524
}