State v. Alexander

Decision Date11 March 2022
Docket Number234PA20
Citation380 N.C. 572,869 S.E.2d 215
Parties STATE of North Carolina v. Kelvin Alphonso ALEXANDER
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court

Joshua H. Stein, Attorney General, by Kristin J. Uicker, Assistant Attorney General, for the State-appellee.

Glenn Gerding, Appellate Defender, by Anne M. Gomez, Assistant Appellate Defender, for defendant-appellant.

Julie Boyer, Attorney at Law, by Julie C. Bower; Kelly M. Dermody ; and Evan J. Ballan, for The Innocence Network, amicus curiae.

ERVIN, Justice.

¶ 1 This case arises from a motion for postconviction DNA testing pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 15A-269 filed by defendant Kelvin Alphonso Alexander over two decades after he entered a plea of guilty to second-degree murder. At the conclusion of a hearing held for the purpose of considering defendant's motion, the trial court entered an order denying defendant's request for postconviction DNA testing on the grounds that defendant had failed to show that the requested testing would be material to his defense. On appeal, we have been asked to determine (1) if defendants who are convicted on the basis of a guilty plea are entitled to obtain postconviction DNA testing pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 15A-269 and (2) if so, whether defendant made the necessary showing of materiality in this case. After careful consideration of the record in light of the applicable law, we affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals.

I. Factual Background
A. Substantive Facts

¶ 2 On the morning of 17 September 1992, Carl Boyd was found dead behind the counter of the Amoco service station that he managed in Norlina. After being dispatched to the Amoco station, Deputy Sheriff William H. Aiken of the Warren County Sheriff's Office, who was accompanied by Special Agent D.G. McDougall of the State Bureau of Investigation, discovered that Mr. Boyd had been shot multiple times. A subsequent autopsy revealed that Mr. Boyd had sustained four gunshot wounds to his back, abdomen, and forearm, with the medical examiner having expressed the opinion that these wounds had been inflicted using a .22 caliber handgun.

¶ 3 In the course of their examination of the Amoco station, Deputy Aiken and Special Agent McDougall seized several items of evidence, including a .22 caliber projectile and three .22 caliber shell casings that were discovered on the service station floor. In addition, Special Agent McDougall collected eighteen latent print lifts from various parts of the service station. An SBI analyst later determined that these lifts contained five usable latent fingerprints and two usable latent palm prints and that three of the fingerprints belonged to Mr. Boyd and his wife. The firearm that had been used to kill Mr. Boyd was never recovered.

¶ 4 On 19 September 1992, Deputy Aiken interviewed Orlinda Lashley, who had been in the crowd outside the Amoco station while the investigating officers were there. According to a subsequent report prepared by Special Agent R.G. Sims of the State Bureau of Investigation, Ms. Lashley told Deputy Aiken that she had arrived at the Amoco station at approximately 7:15 a.m. and had been standing next to the gas tanks when she heard shouting, followed by two loud noises, emanating from the interior of the service station. At that point, according to Ms. Lashley, two men emerged from the front of the store, one of whom Ms. Lashley identified by name as defendant. As defendant emerged from the Amoco station, defendant told Ms. Lashley, "Hold it bitch, if you make a move, you're dead," after which he and the other man got into a vehicle that they were using and drove away. Ms. Lashley claimed to have left to go home before returning to the service station, in which she found Mr. Boyd, who died while holding her hands. After walking to another business across the street and contacting law enforcement officers, Ms. Lashley noticed that defendant was in the crowd that had gathered outside the Amoco station.

¶ 5 In light of the information that Ms. Lashley had provided, Deputy Aiken placed defendant under arrest. At the time that he was questioned by investigating officers, defendant denied having had any involvement in the killing of Mr. Boyd and claimed that he had been at home in bed at the time of the robbery and murder. Defendant did, on the other hand, admit to having gone to the Amoco station and to having stood outside while investigating officers were in the building, although he denied having ever entered the service station after Mr. Boyd began operating the business. Tanika Brown, the teenage daughter of defendant's father's girlfriend, who lived with defendant, told Special Agent Sims that defendant had been in bed on the morning of Mr. Boyd's death and that she had spoken to defendant at approximately 7:10 a.m. or 7:15 a.m. about borrowing a gold chain from him given that school photographs were to be taken that day.

¶ 6 On 21 September 1992, Deputy Aiken and Special Agent Sims interviewed Ms. Lashley for a second time. Although the investigating officers showed her a photographic lineup that contained images of six suspects, including defendant, Ms. Lashley failed to identify any of the individuals depicted in the photographic array. At the time of defendant's sentencing hearing, Ms. Lashley explained that, even though she had recognized defendant's photo when she was shown the photographic lineup, she had not pointed him out because she had been asked to identify the second person that she had seen leaving the Amoco station rather than defendant. After the second interview, Ms. Lashley provided a formal statement describing what she had seen, which was handwritten by Special Agent Sims and which Ms. Lashley annotated and signed.

¶ 7 In this written statement, Ms. Lashley said that, after leaving the Amoco station, she had parked in a nearby driveway to clean herself and change her clothes,1 at which point her "conscience was kicking in" and she "knew [she] had to go back." In light of this attack of conscience, Ms. Lashley said that she drove to the F&S Convenience Store, which was located across the street from the Amoco station, where she learned that Mr. Boyd had been shot. After determining that investigating officers and emergency medical personnel had been dispatched to the wrong location, Ms. Lashley claimed to have called 911 and informed the dispatcher that the officers and emergency medical personnel were needed at the Amoco station. According to Ms. Lashley, she accompanied the paramedics into the service station, where she saw Mr. Boyd's body, but did not "administer aid or touch him in any way." Ms. Lashley stated that she had not spoken to investigating officers at that time because she "was scared to death," that she had known defendant for "most of his life," that defendant had gone to school with her nephew, and that she knew defendant's father. Although she was shown the photographic lineup again at the conclusion of this second interview, Ms. Lashley again failed to identify any of the individuals who were depicted in that array.

¶ 8 On 20 October 1992, Special Agent McDougall interviewed Nell and Bonnie Ricks concerning a robbery that had occurred at a rest area located on Interstate 85 on the morning of Mr. Boyd's murder. At the time of that conversation, Mr. Ricks stated that, at approximately 7:00 a.m., he and his wife had stopped at the rest area, which Deputy Aiken claimed to be a "two or three minutes’ drive" from the Amoco station, and that he was using the restroom when a Black male held him at gunpoint using what appeared to be a sawed-off shotgun or .22 caliber rifle and demanded to be given Mr. Ricks’ wallet. After handing over his wallet to the assailant, Mr. Ricks remained in the restroom for another minute before returning to his car and calling law enforcement officers. Ms. Ricks told Special Agent McDougall that she had seen a Black man who was at least six feet tall, slender, and approximately twenty-five years old exit the rest area building and enter an older, medium-sized white car. Although Ms. Ricks was later shown a photographic lineup that contained defendant's image, Ms. Ricks did not identify anyone depicted in the lineup as the person that she had seen at the rest area.

B. Procedural History

¶ 9 On 19 October 1992, the Warren County grand jury returned bills of indictment charging defendant with first-degree murder and robbery with a dangerous weapon. In the course of pretrial proceedings, the prosecutor informed defendant's trial counsel that the State had a "credible eyewitness" who could identify defendant as Mr. Boyd's killer and that there was a "substantial possibility that [defendant] would be convicted of first-degree murder." The prosecutor did not, however, provide defendant's trial counsel with Ms. Lashley's name or give defendant's trial counsel access to either Special Agent Sims’ report concerning Deputy Aiken's initial interview with Ms. Lashley or the handwritten statement that Ms. Lashley had annotated and signed at the time of her second interview.

¶ 10 The charges against defendant came on for trial before Judge Knox V. Jenkins, Jr., at the 15 November 1993 criminal session of Superior Court, Warren County. On 16 November 1993, during the process of selecting a death-qualified jury, defendant entered into a plea agreement with the State pursuant to which he agreed to plead guilty to second-degree murder in return for the dismissal of the robbery with a dangerous weapon charge, with sentencing to be left to Judge Jenkins’ discretion. In addition, the State agreed to produce its eyewitness at the sentencing hearing, during which she could be cross-examined by defendant's trial counsel. After accepting defendant's guilty plea, Judge Jenkins scheduled a sentencing hearing for the following day.

¶ 11 In the course of the ensuing sentencing hearing, Ms. Lashley testified in a manner that was generally consistent with the written statement that she had signed and annotated at...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • State v. Elder
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
    • December 16, 2022
    ...For that reason, the issue before this Court in Morris was identical to the one that is before us now. See State v. Alexander , 380 N.C. 572, 2022-NCSC-26, ¶ 26, 869 S.E.2d 215 (noting that, "when an appeal is taken pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2), the only issues properly before the Court ......
  • State v. Benner
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
    • March 11, 2022
  • State v. Robinson
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
    • May 6, 2022
    ......¶ 42 "[A] plea arrangement or bargain is ‘[a] negotiated agreement between a prosecutor and a criminal defendant whereby the defendant pleads guilty to a lesser offense or to one of multiple charges in exchange for some concession by the prosecutor ..’ " State v. Alexander , 359 N.C. 824, 830, 616 S.E.2d 914, 919 (2005) (second alteration in original) (quoting Plea Bargain , Black's Law Dictionary (7th ed. 1999)). Because "[a] plea of guilty .. involves the waiver of various fundamental rights," 381 N.C. 222 State v. Sinclair , 301 N.C. 193, 197, 270 S.E.2d ......
  • State v. Elder
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
    • December 16, 2022
    ...For that reason, the issue before this Court in Morris was identical to the one that is before us now. See State v. Alexander, 380 N.C. 572, 2022-NCSC-26, ¶ 26 (noting that, "when an appeal is taken pursuant to N.C. G.S. § 7A-30(2), the only issues properly before the Court are those on whi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT