Issue

Robbery with a dangerous weapon—taking of property—sufficiency of evidence

Summary

The trial court properly denied defendant's motion to dismiss the charge of robbery with a dangerous weapon where the State's evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the State, constituted substantial evidence from which a jury could conclude that defendant took the victim's property–either himself or acting in concert with another–including: the victim was first pistol-whipped by defendant and then stomped on by defendant and other assailants and, when the victim woke up after a period of unconsciousness, his phone, house key, and cash were missing. Along with evidence of defendant's opportunity to take the victim's property, the State presented evidence pursuant to Evidence Rule 404(b) that defendant participated in a prior armed robbery, which tended to support the inference that defendant committed the attack in this case with the intent to rob the victim. Therefore, the decision of the Court of Appeals reversing defendant's conviction was itself reversed.

Summary from the North Carolina Reports digest (official subject index). Read the opinion →