{
  "id": 8525685,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. LACY KEYSER JACKSON",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Jackson",
  "decision_date": "1985-11-19",
  "docket_number": "No. 8520SC371",
  "first_page": "832",
  "last_page": "834",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "77 N.C. App. 832"
    }
  ],
  "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": "304 S.E. 2d 757",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "308 N.C. 678",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        4706442,
        4707563,
        4708240,
        4706481,
        4705500
      ],
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/308/0678-01",
        "/nc/308/0678-04",
        "/nc/308/0678-05",
        "/nc/308/0678-02",
        "/nc/308/0678-03"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "301 S.E. 2d 411",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "61 N.C. App. 535",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8522293
      ],
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/61/0535-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 312,
    "char_count": 4394,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.817,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.4040947525055406e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7992230435056252
    },
    "sha256": "62773157a6e3967353c7d4bb5434a4d9bef1d5b7b5c3a3a2456cf5bf2984eddb",
    "simhash": "1:cf615d3b8c391197",
    "word_count": 717
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:22:01.691260+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges Johnson and Phillips concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. LACY KEYSER JACKSON"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "WEBB, Judge.\nDefendant\u2019s sole assignment of error is that the trial court erred in allowing Lillian Kerns to testify with respect to statements made by defendant. Lillian Kerns is the mother of the victim. She is also the defendant\u2019s aunt, and a minister. Mrs. Kerns visited defendant several times while he was in jail. She testified in court that defendant admitted his guilt to her during these visits. Defendant now contends the admission of this testimony violated the clergy-communicant privilege of G.S. 8-53.2.\nG.S. 8-53.2 provides:\nNo priest, rabbi, accredited Christian Science practitioner, or a clergyman or ordained minister of an established church shall be competent to testify in any action, suit or proceeding concerning any information which was communicated to him and entrusted to him in his professional capacity, and necessary to enable him to discharge the functions of his office according to the usual course of his practice or discipline, wherein such person so communicating such information about himself or another is seeking spiritual counsel and advice relative to and growing out of the information so imparted, provided, however, that this section shall not apply where communicant in open court waives the privilege conferred.\nDefendant did not waive the privilege in open court. The dispositive issue is whether he was \u201cseeking spiritual counsel\u201d and speaking to Kerns in her professional capacity.\nMrs. Kerns\u2019 uncontradicted testimony indicates that she initiated the visits to defendant while he was in jail, that she asked him about the crimes, and that she sought to comfort him. She approached him both as a close relative and as a minister: \u201cI felt somewhat like a mother to him, and of course, like a Pastor. I was trying to see his feelings and try [sic] to encourage him.\u201d Defendant responded to Kerns\u2019 efforts, in her dual capacity as relative and minister, to ease his depression. \u201cAt first he denied it. I said okay so we would just have to keep on praying. Then of course during the last time \u2014second to the last time I talked to him he admitted \u2014he said, T did it.\u2019 \u201d\nIt is impossible to determine to what extent defendant confided in Kerns as a relative and to what extent as a minister. However, she was acting at least in part in her professional capacity. His admission came after they prayed together. The comfort and encouragement she gave him can fairly be described as spiritual counsel. In these circumstances the privilege of G.S. 8-53.2 applies. This situation is no less compelling than the only reported case under the current version of the statute, Spencer v. Spencer, 61 N.C. App. 535, 301 S.E. 2d 411, disc. rev. denied, 308 N.C. 678, 304 S.E. 2d 757 (1983). In Spencer the statute was held to bar a minister\u2019s testimony concerning statements made to him during marriage counseling sessions. The statements of a defendant seeking forgiveness and solace from a minister deserve no less protection, even if the minister is also a relative.\nNew trial.\nJudges Johnson and Phillips concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "WEBB, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Lacy H. Thornburg, by Assistant Attorney General Richard L. Griffin, for the State.",
      "Sherwood F. Lapping for defendant, appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. LACY KEYSER JACKSON\nNo. 8520SC371\n(Filed 19 November 1985)\nCriminal Law \u00a7 82\u2014 clergy-communicant privilege\nIn a prosecution for rape and burglary, the clergy-communicant privilege of G.S. 8-53.2 was violated by the admission of testimony by defendant\u2019s aunt, who was also a minister and the victim\u2019s mother, that defendant admitted his guilt to her during a visit with him in jail where the aunt initiated the visits to defendant and asked him about the crimes, she approached defendant as a close relative and minister, defendant\u2019s admission came after they had prayed together, and the comfort and encouragement the aunt gave defendant can fairly be described as spiritual counsel.\nAppeal by defendant from McConnell, Judge. Judgment entered 7 December 1984 in Superior Court, MOORE County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 17 October 1985.\nDefendant was indicted for rape and burglary. The State\u2019s evidence tended to show that defendant broke into his cousin\u2019s mobile home at night and forcibly had sex with her against her will. The jury found defendant guilty of first degree burglary and second degree rape. From judgment entered on the verdict, defendant appealed.\nAttorney General Lacy H. Thornburg, by Assistant Attorney General Richard L. Griffin, for the State.\nSherwood F. Lapping for defendant, appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0832-01",
  "first_page_order": 864,
  "last_page_order": 866
}