{
  "id": 8358476,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. CHARLIE LEE",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Lee",
  "decision_date": "1988-01-19",
  "docket_number": "No. 876SC432",
  "first_page": "478",
  "last_page": "480",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "88 N.C. App. 478"
    }
  ],
  "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": "275 S.E. 2d 857",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1981,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "51 N.C. App. 108",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        2643487
      ],
      "year": 1981,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/51/0108-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "144 Ariz. 48",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ariz.",
      "case_ids": [
        1513963
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1985,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ariz/144/0048-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "40 S.E. 2d 103",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1946,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "74 Ga. App. 449",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ga. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        1532809
      ],
      "year": 1946,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ga-app/74/0449-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "161 S.E. 2d 103",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1968,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "273 N.C. 721",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8576142
      ],
      "year": 1968,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/273/0721-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 308,
    "char_count": 4023,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.8,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.8096863784351087e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7176014895076894
    },
    "sha256": "264d7f51ea4d95687d29c6d7af20ea42f6d3dfaf3ff68bbedbd027601f4800d9",
    "simhash": "1:8620851a34ef1cfd",
    "word_count": 685
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:20:42.285314+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges BeCTON and GREENE concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. CHARLIE LEE"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PHILLIPS, Judge.\nDefendant\u2019s conviction of larceny from the person, G.S. 14-72 (b)(1), cannot stand because the record shows that the larceny involved was not from the person of the complainant as charged in the bill of indictment, but was from an unattended grocery cart. In pertinent part the evidence presented, all by the State, shows only that: Lois Strickland, while shopping at the Farm Fresh Store in Roanoke Rapids, had her shoulder handbag in the grocery cart she was pushing along when Anthony Taylor, defendant\u2019s accomplice in the thievery, asked her to help him find some unsalted sweet peas; pursuant to the request Ms. Strickland took \u201cfour or five\u201d steps away from the cart and looked up and down the shelves and talked with Taylor for \u201ca couple of minutes probably,\u201d and during that time defendant got the shoulder bag, which along with its contents had a value of $276 according to the indictment, and left the store with it. Upon returning to the cart and noticing that the bag was missing, Ms. Strickland reported the theft to store personnel and defendant was identified and apprehended a few minutes later.\nIn arguing that the evidence shows a larceny from the person the State relies upon three decisions in which similar convictions were upheld: State v. Massey, 273 N.C. 721, 161 S.E. 2d 103 (1968), where the wallet was not on the person of the victim when it was stolen but was on the ground, knocked there as a consequence of defendant\u2019s battery that immediately preceded the larceny; Banks v. State, 74 Ga. App. 449, 40 S.E. 2d 103 (1946), where money was stolen from under the pillow upon which the head of the sleeping victim rested; and State v. Tramble, 144 Ariz. 48, 695 P. 2d 737 (1985), where defendant reached through the window of a car and snatched a purse lying on the seat next to the victim. For reasons that appear to be self-evident to us, none of these cases is analogous to this case and none is authority for upholding defendant\u2019s conviction of larceny from the person.\nThe deficiency in the State\u2019s evidence was not raised directly by a motion for a directed verdict, as it should have been, and is only before us because defendant objected to and assigned as error the trial judge\u2019s charge to the jury as to the meaning of the term \u201cfrom the person\u201d and argued that he was entitled to a new trial. But since the deficiency in the State\u2019s evidence is so clear and cannot be remedied in a second trial, fundamental fairness and the orderly administration of justice require that we treat defendant\u2019s objection to the instruction as a motion for a directed verdict on the charge stated. In vacating the larceny from the person conviction, however, we note that the evidence and verdict support a conviction of the lesser included offense of misdemeanor larceny, State v. Cornell, 51 N.C. App. 108, 275 S.E. 2d 857 (1981), and remand the matter to the trial court so defendant can be sentenced for that offense in compliance with G.S. 14-3(a). Under the circumstances, defendant\u2019s other argument for a new trial need not be ruled upon.\nVacated and remanded.\nJudges BeCTON and GREENE concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PHILLIPS, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Thornburg, by Assistant Attorney General Doris J. Holton, for the State.",
      "Thomas I. Benton for defendant appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. CHARLIE LEE\nNo. 876SC432\n(Filed 19 January 1988)\nLarceny \u00a7 7.5\u2014 larceny from the person charged \u2014 taking from unattended grocery cart \u2014 conviction improper\nDefendant\u2019s conviction of larceny from the person pursuant to N.C.G.S. \u00a7 14-72(b)(l) cannot stand because the record shows that the larceny involved was not from the person of the complainant, as charged in the bill of indictment, but was from an unattended grocery cart; however, the evidence and the verdict will support a conviction of the lesser included offense of misdemeanor larceny.\nOn writ of certiorari to review judgment entered by Stevens, Judge. Judgment entered 10 July 1986 in Superior Court, HALIFAX County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 17 November 1987.\nAttorney General Thornburg, by Assistant Attorney General Doris J. Holton, for the State.\nThomas I. Benton for defendant appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0478-01",
  "first_page_order": 506,
  "last_page_order": 508
}