{
  "id": 4152409,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ROBERT PETER VOGT, JR.",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Vogt",
  "decision_date": "2010-10-08",
  "docket_number": "No. 465A09",
  "first_page": "425",
  "last_page": "442",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "364 N.C. 425"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "685 S.E.2d 23",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2009,
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "698 S.E.2d 49",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2010,
      "opinion_index": 1
    },
    {
      "cite": "364 N.C. 249",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        4153103
      ],
      "year": 2010,
      "opinion_index": 1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/364/0249-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "558 S.E.2d 87",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2002,
      "opinion_index": 1
    },
    {
      "cite": "355 N.C. 136",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        220122
      ],
      "year": 2002,
      "opinion_index": 1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/355/0136-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 214,
    "char_count": 8955,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.734,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.0446031217563963e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7515048174623308
    },
    "sha256": "05a85b13f7c2f9ec21fa2ecccf66337382ff1ce3fc28f3469d75c5c56b7cf64e",
    "simhash": "1:a0c11f204ec3340c",
    "word_count": 1401
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:08:37.384656+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ROBERT PETER VOGT, JR."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER CURIAM.\nFor the reasons stated in State v. Bowditch, \u2014 N.C. \u2014, \u2014 S.E.2d \u2014 (2010) (448PA09), the decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.\nAFFIRMED.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER CURIAM."
      },
      {
        "text": "Chief Justice PARKER and Justices TIMMONS-GOODSON and HUDSON\ndissent for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion in State v. Bowditch, \u2014N.C. \u2014, \u2014 S.E.2d \u2014 (2010) (448PA09).\nSTATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. BILLY RAYMOND ANDERSON\n) ) ) ) )\nORDER\nNo. 269A00\nThe motions filed by defendant with this Court on 10 August 2010 are determined as follows:\n1. Defendant\u2019s Motion to Dismiss Appellant\u2019s Motion Filed in this Court Under the North Carolina Racial Justice Act Without Prejudice to File a Motion Under the Racial Justice Act in Post-Conviction Proceedings If Appellant Is Not [ ] Granted Relief on Direct Appeal or in His Pending MAR filed Pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. Sec. 15A-2006 is DISMISSED.\n2. Defendant\u2019s Motion in the Alternative to Remand to the Superior Court of Craven County for an Evidentiary Hearing and Other Proceedings is DISMISSED.\n3. Defendant\u2019s Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.\nFurther proceedings in defendant\u2019s appeal before this Court are stayed until after the trial court\u2019s hearing and determination of defendant\u2019s Motion for Appropriate Relief pursuant to N.C.G.S. \u00a7 15A-2005, see, State v. Anderson, 355 N.C. 136, 558 S.E.2d 87 (2002), and defendant\u2019s Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act filed in Superior. Court, Craven County.\nBy Order of the Court in Conference, this 7th day of September 2010.\nHudson. J.\nFor the Court\nSTATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. IZIAH BARDEN\n) ) ) ) )\nORDER\nNo. 96A01-3\nThe motions filed by defendant with this Court on 10 August 2010 are determined as follows:\n1. Defendant\u2019s Motion to Dismiss Appellant\u2019s Motion Filed in this Court Under the North Carolina Racial Justice Act Without Prejudice t\u00f3 File a Motion Under-the Racial Justice Act in Post-Conviction Proceedings If Appellant Is Not [ ] Granted Relief on Direct Appeal is DISMISSED.\n2. Defendant\u2019s Motion in the Alternative to Remand to the Superior Court of Sampson County for an Evidentiary Hearing and Other Proceedings is DISMISSED.\n3. Defendant\u2019s Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.\nFurther proceedings in defendant\u2019s appeal before this Court are stayed until after the trial court\u2019s hearing and determination of defendant\u2019s Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act filed in Superior Court, Sampson County.\nBy Order of the Court in Conference, this 7th day of September 2010.\nHudson. J.\nFor the Court\nSTATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JAMES RAY LITTLE III\n) ) ) ) )\nORDER\nNo. 221A09\nThe motions filed by defendant with this Court on 10 August 2010 are determined as follows:\n1. Defendant\u2019s Motion to Dismiss Appellant\u2019s Motion Filed in this Court Under the North Carolina Racial Justice Act Without Prejudice to File a Motion Under the Racial Justice Act in Post-Conviction Proceedings If Appellant Is Not Granted Relief on Direct Appeal is DISMISSED.\n2. Defendant\u2019s Motion in the Alternative to Remand to the Superior Court of [Forsyth] County for an Evidentiary Hearing and Other Proceedings is DISMISSED.\n3. Defendant\u2019s Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.\nThis case is removed from the 7 September 2010 oral'arguments calendar, and further proceedings in defendant\u2019s appeal before this Court are stayed until after the trial court\u2019s hearing and determination of defendant\u2019s Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act filed in Superior Court, Forsyth County.\nBy Order of the Court in Conference, this 7th day of September 2010.\nHudson. J.\nFor the Court\nSTATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. MICHAEL WAYNE SHERRILL\n) ) ) ) )\nORDER\nNo. 246A09\nThe motions filed by defendant with this Court on 10 August 2010 are determined as follows:\n1. Defendant\u2019s Motion to Dismiss Appellant\u2019s Motion Filed in this Court Under the North Carolina Racial Justice Act Without Prejudice to File a Motion Under the Racial Justice Act in Post-Conviction Proceedings If Appellant Is Not [ ] Granted Relief on Direct Appeal is DISMISSED.\n2. Defendant\u2019s Motion in the Alternative to Remand to the Superior Court of Mecklenburg County for an Evidentiary Hearing and Other Proceedings is DISMISSED.\n3. Defendant\u2019s Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.\nFurther proceedings in defendant\u2019s appeal before this Court are stayed until after the trial court\u2019s hearing and determination of defendant\u2019s Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act filed in Superior Court, Mecklenburg County.\nBy Order of the Court in Conference, this 7th day of September 2010.\nHudson. J.\nFor the Court\nSTATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. HASSON JAMAAL BACOTE\n) ) ) ) )\nORDER\nNo. 360A09\nThe motions filed by defendant with this Court on 10 August 2010 are determined as follows:\n1. Defendant\u2019s Motion to Dismiss Appellant\u2019s Motion filed in this Court Under the North Carolina Racial Justice Act Without Prejudice to File a Motion Under the Racial Justice Act in Post-Conviction Proceedings If Appellant Is Not [ ] Granted Relief on Direct Appeal is DISMISSED.\n2. Defendant\u2019s Motion in the Alternative to Remand to the ' Superior Court of [Johnston] County for an Evidentiary Hearing and Other Proceedings is DISMISSED.\n3. Defendant\u2019s Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.\nFurther proceedings in defendant\u2019s appeal before this Court are stayed until after the trial court\u2019s hearing and determination of defendant\u2019s Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act filed in Superior Court, Johnston County.\nBy Order of the Court in Conference, this 7th day of September 2010.\nHudson. J.\nFor the Court\nSTATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JOHN ROSWELL REYNOLDS, JR.\n) ) ) ) )\nORDER\nNo. 1P10\nThe State\u2019s Petition for Writ of Certiorari to review the order of Caswell County, Superior Court, is allowed for the limited purpose of remanding to the trial court for reconsideration in light of Jones v. Keller, 364 N.C. 249, 698 S.E.2d 49 (2010).\nBy order of this Court in Conference, this 7th day of October, 2010.\nTimmons-Goodson. J.\nFor the Court\nSTATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. MICHAEL PATRICK RYAN\n) ) ) ) )\nORDER\nNo. 366A10\nThe motions filed by defendant with this Court on 10 August 2010 are determined as follows:\n1. Defendant\u2019s Motion to Dismiss Appellant\u2019s Motion Filed in this Court Under the North Carolina Racial Justice Act Without Prejudice to File a Motion Under the Racial Justice Act in Post-Conviction Proceedings If Appellant Is Not Granted Relief on Direct Appeal is DISMISSED.\n2. Defendant\u2019s Motion in the Alternative to Remand to the Superior Court of Gaston County for an Evidentiary Hearing and Other Proceedings is DISMISSED.\n3. Defendant\u2019s Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.\nFurther proceedings in defendant\u2019s appeal before this Court are stayed until after the trial court\u2019s hearing and determination of defendant\u2019s Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act filed in Superior Court, Gaston County.\nBy Order of the Court in Conference, this 7th day of September 2010.\nHudson. J.\nFor the Court\nSTATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ANDREW DARRIN RAMSEUR\n) ) ) ) )\nORDER\nNo. 388A10\nThe motions filed by defendant with this Court on 10 August 2010 are determined as follows:\n1. Defendant\u2019s Motion to Dismiss Appellant\u2019s Motion Filed in this Court Under the North Carolina Racial Justice Act Without Prejudice to File a Motion Under the Racial Justice Act in Post-Conviction Proceedings If Appellant Is Not Granted Relief on Direct Appeal is DISMISSED.\n2. Defendant\u2019s Motion in the Alternative to Remand to the Superior Court of Iredell County for an Evidentiary Hearing and Other Proceedings is DISMISSED.\n3. Defendant\u2019s Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.\nFurther proceedings in defendant\u2019s appeal before this Court are stayed until after the trial court\u2019s hearing and determination of defendant\u2019s Motion for Appropriate Relief Pursuant to the Racial Justice Act filed in Superior Court, Iredell County.\nBy Order of the Court in Conference, this 7th day of September 2010.\nHudson. J.\nFor the Court",
        "type": "dissent",
        "author": "Chief Justice PARKER and Justices TIMMONS-GOODSON and HUDSON"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Roy Cooper, Attorney General, by Peter A. Regulski, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.",
      "William D. Aumanfor defendant-appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ROBERT PETER VOGT, JR.\nNo. 465A09\n(Filed 8 October 2010)\n. Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. \u00a7 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 200 N.C. App.-, 685 S.E.2d 23 (2009), affirming an order entered on 3 July 2008 by Judge Beverly T. Beal in Superior Court, Mecklenburg County. Heard in the Supreme Court 17 February 2010.\nRoy Cooper, Attorney General, by Peter A. Regulski, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.\nWilliam D. Aumanfor defendant-appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0425-01",
  "first_page_order": 519,
  "last_page_order": 536
}