crime charged error in North Carolina

2017In a criminal case, jurisdiction to try an accused "depends upon a valid bill of indictment guaranteed by Article I, Section 22 of the North Carolina Constitution." State v. Snyder , 343 N.C. 61 , 65, 468 S.E.2d 221 , 224 (1996). 1 The purpose of the indictment is to provide the Defendant with "sufficient detail to put the defendant on notice as to the nature of the crime charged and to bar subsequent prosecution for the same offense in violation of the prohibitions against double jeopardy." State v. Burroughs , 147 N.C.

2017In a criminal case, jurisdiction to try an accused "depends upon a valid bill of indictment guaranteed by Article I, Section 22 of the North Carolina Constitution." State v. Snyder , 343 N.C. 61 , 65, 468 S.E.2d 221 , 224 (1996). 1 The purpose of the indictment is to provide the Defendant with "sufficient detail to put the defendant on notice as to the nature of the crime charged and to bar subsequent prosecution for the same offense in violation of the prohibitions against double jeopardy." State v. Burroughs , 147 N.C.

2019App. ----, ----, 821 S.E.2d 259 , 266 (2018) (citations and quotation marks omitted).

2019App. ----, ----, 791 S.E.2d 248 , 255 (2016) (citations omitted).

2019Failure to instruct upon all substantive or material features of the crime charged is error." State v. Bogle , 324 N.C. 190 , 195, 376 S.E.2d 745 , 748 (1989). "[W]here a charge fully instructs the jury on substantive features of the case, defines and applies the law thereto, the trial court is not required to instruct on a subordinate feature of the case absent a special request." Blackstock , 314 N.C. at 245 , 333 S.E.2d at 253 .

2019Failure to instruct upon all substantive or material features of the crime charged is error." State v. Bogle , 324 N.C. 190 , 195, 376 S.E.2d 745 , 748 (1989). "[W]here a charge fully instructs the jury on substantive features of the case, defines and applies the law thereto, the trial court is not required to instruct on a subordinate feature of the case absent a special request." Blackstock , 314 N.C. at 245 , 333 S.E.2d at 253 .

2018However, "[w]hen a trial court agrees to give a requested pattern instruction, an erroneous deviation from that instruction is preserved for appellate review without further request or objection." State v. Lee , 370 N.C. 671 , 676, 811 S.E.2d 563 , 567 (2018). "[A] request for an instruction at the charge conference is sufficient compliance with the rule to warrant our full review on appeal where the requested instruction is subsequently promised but not given, notwithstanding any failure to bring the error to the trial judge's attention at the end of the instructions." Id . (quoting State v.

2018However, "[w]hen a trial court agrees to give a requested pattern instruction, an erroneous deviation from that instruction is preserved for appellate review without further request or objection." State v. Lee , 370 N.C. 671 , 676, 811 S.E.2d 563 , 567 (2018). "[A] request for an instruction at the charge conference is sufficient compliance with the rule to warrant our full review on appeal where the requested instruction is subsequently promised but not given, notwithstanding any failure to bring the error to the trial judge's attention at the end of the instructions." Id . (quoting State v.

2018However, "[w]hen a trial court agrees to give a requested pattern instruction, an erroneous deviation from that instruction is preserved for appellate review without further request or objection." State v. Lee , 370 N.C. 671 , 676, 811 S.E.2d 563 , 567 (2018). "[A] request for an instruction at the charge conference is sufficient compliance with the rule to warrant our full review on appeal where the requested instruction is subsequently promised but not given, notwithstanding any failure to bring the error to the trial judge's attention at the end of the instructions." Id . (quoting State v.

2018However, "[w]hen a trial court agrees to give a requested pattern instruction, an erroneous deviation from that instruction is preserved for appellate review without further request or objection." State v. Lee , 370 N.C. 671 , 676, 811 S.E.2d 563 , 567 (2018). "[A] request for an instruction at the charge conference is sufficient compliance with the rule to warrant our full review on appeal where the requested instruction is subsequently promised but not given, notwithstanding any failure to bring the error to the trial judge's attention at the end of the instructions." Id . (quoting State v.

2016On the other hand, "a trial judge should not give instructions to the jury which are not supported by the evidence produced at the trial." State v. Cameron , 284 N.C. 165 , 171, 200 S.E.2d 186 , 191 (1973), cert. denied , 418 U.S. 905 , 94 S.Ct. 3195 , 41 L.Ed.2d 1153 (1974). *392 "An instruction on a lesser-included offense must be given only if the evidence would permit the jury rationally to find defendant guilty of the lesser offense and to acquit him of the greater." State v. Millsaps , 356 N.C. 556 , 561, 572 S.E.2d 767 , 771 (2002) ; see also State v. Bailey , 278 N.C. 80 , 86, 178 S.E.

2016On the other hand, "a trial judge should not give instructions to the jury which are not supported by the evidence produced at the trial." State v. Cameron , 284 N.C. 165 , 171, 200 S.E.2d 186 , 191 (1973), cert. denied , 418 U.S. 905 , 94 S.Ct. 3195 , 41 L.Ed.2d 1153 (1974). *392 "An instruction on a lesser-included offense must be given only if the evidence would permit the jury rationally to find defendant guilty of the lesser offense and to acquit him of the greater." State v. Millsaps , 356 N.C. 556 , 561, 572 S.E.2d 767 , 771 (2002) ; see also State v. Bailey , 278 N.C. 80 , 86, 178 S.E.

2016On the other hand, "a trial judge should not give instructions to the jury which are not supported by the evidence produced at the trial." State v. Cameron , 284 N.C. 165 , 171, 200 S.E.2d 186 , 191 (1973), cert. denied , 418 U.S. 905 , 94 S.Ct. 3195 , 41 L.Ed.2d 1153 (1974). *392 "An instruction on a lesser-included offense must be given only if the evidence would permit the jury rationally to find defendant guilty of the lesser offense and to acquit him of the greater." State v. Millsaps , 356 N.C. 556 , 561, 572 S.E.2d 767 , 771 (2002) ; see also State v. Bailey , 278 N.C. 80 , 86, 178 S.E.

2014“When supported by competent evidence, self-defense unquestionably becomes a substantial and essential feature of a criminal case.” Deck, 285 N.C. at 215 , 203 S.E.2d at 834 .

2014“When supported by competent evidence, self-defense unquestionably becomes a substantial and essential feature of a criminal case.” Deck, 285 N.C. at 215 , 203 S.E.2d at 834 .

2013“An instruction about a material matter must be based on sufficient evidence.” State v. Osorio, 196 N.C.

2012“North Carolina statutes and case law do not require a trial court to use the exact words a defendant requests to charge the jury.” State v. Sanders, 171 N.C.

2007The law is settled that "[i]n charging a criminal offense, an indictment must state the elements of the offense with sufficient detail to put the defendant on notice as to the nature of the crime charged and to bar subsequent prosecution for the same offense...." State v. Poole, 154 N.C.App. 419 , 422, 572 S.E.2d 433 , 436 (2002), cert. denied, 356 N.C. 689 , 578 S.E.2d 589 (2003).

2007The law is settled that "[i]n charging a criminal offense, an indictment must state the elements of the offense with sufficient detail to put the defendant on notice as to the nature of the crime charged and to bar subsequent prosecution for the same offense...." State v. Poole, 154 N.C.App. 419 , 422, 572 S.E.2d 433 , 436 (2002), cert. denied, 356 N.C. 689 , 578 S.E.2d 589 (2003).

2007The law is settled that "[i]n charging a criminal offense, an indictment must state the elements of the offense with sufficient detail to put the defendant on notice as to the nature of the crime charged and to bar subsequent prosecution for the same offense...." State v. Poole, 154 N.C.App. 419 , 422, 572 S.E.2d 433 , 436 (2002), cert. denied, 356 N.C. 689 , 578 S.E.2d 589 (2003).

2007The law is settled that "[i]n charging a criminal offense, an indictment must state the elements of the offense with sufficient detail to put the defendant on notice as to the nature of the crime charged and to bar subsequent prosecution for the same offense...." State v. Poole, 154 N.C.App. 419 , 422, 572 S.E.2d 433 , 436 (2002), cert. denied, 356 N.C. 689 , 578 S.E.2d 589 (2003).

2001Id. “ ‘In an indictment for robbery with firearms or other dangerous weapons (G.S. 14-87), the gist of the offense is not the taking of personal property, but a taking or attempted taking by force or putting in fear by the use of firearms or other dangerous weapon.’ ” State v. Mahaley, 122 N.C.

1989State v. Loftin, 322 N.C. 375 , 368 S.E.2d 613 (1988) (error to fail to instruct on defense of accident); State v. Shaw, 322 N.C. 797 , 370 S.E.2d 546 (1988) (no error to fail to instruct on identification where instructions as a whole made clear that the jury must find beyond a reasonable doubt defendant committed the burglary); State v. Fearing, 304 N.C. 471 , 284 S.E.2d 487 (1981) (error to fail to instruct that defendant knew the object he hit was a person); State v. Ferrell, 300 N.C. 157 , 265 S.E.2d 210 (1980) (prejudicial error to fail to instruct on the lesser included offense of volun

1989State v. Loftin, 322 N.C. 375 , 368 S.E.2d 613 (1988) (error to fail to instruct on defense of accident); State v. Shaw, 322 N.C. 797 , 370 S.E.2d 546 (1988) (no error to fail to instruct on identification where instructions as a whole made clear that the jury must find beyond a reasonable doubt defendant committed the burglary); State v. Fearing, 304 N.C. 471 , 284 S.E.2d 487 (1981) (error to fail to instruct that defendant knew the object he hit was a person); State v. Ferrell, 300 N.C. 157 , 265 S.E.2d 210 (1980) (prejudicial error to fail to instruct on the lesser included offense of volun

1989State v. Loftin, 322 N.C. 375 , 368 S.E.2d 613 (1988) (error to fail to instruct on defense of accident); State v. Shaw, 322 N.C. 797 , 370 S.E.2d 546 (1988) (no error to fail to instruct on identification where instructions as a whole made clear that the jury must find beyond a reasonable doubt defendant committed the burglary); State v. Fearing, 304 N.C. 471 , 284 S.E.2d 487 (1981) (error to fail to instruct that defendant knew the object he hit was a person); State v. Ferrell, 300 N.C. 157 , 265 S.E.2d 210 (1980) (prejudicial error to fail to instruct on the lesser included offense of volun

1989State v. Loftin, 322 N.C. 375 , 368 S.E.2d 613 (1988) (error to fail to instruct on defense of accident); State v. Shaw, 322 N.C. 797 , 370 S.E.2d 546 (1988) (no error to fail to instruct on identification where instructions as a whole made clear that the jury must find beyond a reasonable doubt defendant committed the burglary); State v. Fearing, 304 N.C. 471 , 284 S.E.2d 487 (1981) (error to fail to instruct that defendant knew the object he hit was a person); State v. Ferrell, 300 N.C. 157 , 265 S.E.2d 210 (1980) (prejudicial error to fail to instruct on the lesser included offense of volun