{
  "id": 8524945,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JOE W. JACKSON",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Jackson",
  "decision_date": "1984-10-16",
  "docket_number": "No. 8419SC47",
  "first_page": "782",
  "last_page": "784",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "70 N.C. App. 782"
    }
  ],
  "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": "305 S.E. 2d 755",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "63 N.C. App. 512",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8525630
      ],
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/63/0512-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "302 S.E. 2d 265",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "62 N.C. App. 21",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8520056
      ],
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/62/0021-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "300 S.E. 2d 689",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "307 N.C. 584",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8565300
      ],
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/307/0584-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-178",
      "category": "laws:leg_statute",
      "reporter": "N.C. Gen. Stat.",
      "year": 1981,
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 233,
    "char_count": 3627,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.794,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.770845263994211e-08,
      "percentile": 0.41393204777575837
    },
    "sha256": "5b22baad7492e8274ea1e8fd738e3d44e4676242ecbde6d56be10e1ddc696240",
    "simhash": "1:72e7895a56fbaefe",
    "word_count": 619
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:14:59.534868+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges Arnold and Hill concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JOE W. JACKSON"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "WELLS, Judge.\nIncest is a class G felony and carries a presumptive sentence of four and one-half years. N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-178 (1981). In sentencing defendant, the trial court found one factor in mitigation, that defendant had no record of criminal conviction; found one factor in aggravation, that the victim was very young; found that the factor in aggravation outweighed the factor in mitigation; and sentenced defendant to a term of 6 years.\nIn his sole assignment of error, defendant contends that the trial court erred in finding as a factor in aggravation that the victim was very young. The evidence showed that defendant pled guilty to one count of incest with his 15-year-old daughter, but that defendant\u2019s incestuous relationship with his daughter began when she was 12 years old. In State v. Ahearn, 307 N.C. 584, 300 S.E. 2d 689 (1983), our supreme court held that the factor in aggravation provided for in N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 15A-1340.4(a)(1)(j) (1983), ie., that \u201c[t]he victim was very young, or very old, or mentally or physically infirm\u201d recognizes that vulnerability to harm is the concern addressed in this factor. In State v. Mitchell, 62 N.C. App. 21, 302 S.E. 2d 265 (1983), this court took the position that the underlying policy of this factor in aggravation is to discourage wrongdoers from taking advantage of a victim because of the victim\u2019s young age, or old age, or infirmity. Compare State v. Monk, 63 N.C. App. 512, 305 S.E. 2d 755 (1983), where this court held that the age of the victim may not be used as an aggravating factor unless it appears that the defendant took advantage of the victim\u2019s relative helplessness to commit the crime or that the harm was worse because of the age of the victim.\nWe hold that the evidence in this case supports the trial court\u2019s finding of this factor in aggravation. In so holding, we recognize that (1) defendant took advantage of his daughter\u2019s relative helplessness to resist his sexual activities with her; (2) that a 12 to 15 year-old-girl is vulnerable to sexual advances or solicitations from her father; and (3) the crime of incest between a father and a daughter of 12 to 15 years of age will harm a girl of such age more than it would harm an adult woman.\nAccordingly, we affirm defendant's sentence.\nAffirmed.\nJudges Arnold and Hill concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "WELLS, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Rufus L. Edmisten, by Special Deputy Attorney General Myron C. Banks, for the State.",
      "Rion Brady for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JOE W. JACKSON\nNo. 8419SC47\n(Filed 16 October 1984)\nCriminal Law 8 138\u2014 incest \u2014 aggravating factor \u2014 victim very young\nIn a prosecution for incest where the evidence showed that defendant pled guilty to one count of incest with his fifteen-year-old daughter, but that defendant\u2019s incestuous relationship with his daughter began when she was twelve years old, the evidence supported the trial court\u2019s finding in aggravation that the victim was very young. The Court recognized that (1) defendant took advantage of his daughter\u2019s relative helplessness to resist his sexual activities with her; (2) that a twelve to fifteen-year-old girl is vulnerable to sexual advances or solicitations from her father; and (3) the crime of incest between a father and a daughter of twelve to fifteen years of age will harm a girl of such age more than it would an adult woman. G.S. 15A-1340.4(a)(l)(j).\nAppeal by defendant from Lamm, Charles C., Judge. Judgment entered 22 August 1983 in Randolph County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 25 September 1984.\nDefendant pled guilty to incest and was given a sentence of 6 years, from which he has appealed.\nAttorney General Rufus L. Edmisten, by Special Deputy Attorney General Myron C. Banks, for the State.\nRion Brady for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0782-01",
  "first_page_order": 814,
  "last_page_order": 816
}