State v. Campbell

Citation772 S.E.2d 440,368 N.C. 83
Decision Date11 June 2015
Docket NumberNo. 252PA14.,252PA14.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
Parties STATE of North Carolina v. Thomas Craig CAMPBELL.

368 N.C. 83
772 S.E.2d 440

STATE of North Carolina
v.
Thomas Craig CAMPBELL.

No. 252PA14.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 11, 2015.


Roy Cooper, Attorney General, by Teresa M. Postell, Assistant Attorney General, for the State-appellant.

Staples S. Hughes, Appellate Defender, by Barbara S. Blackman, Assistant Appellate Defender, for defendant-appellee.

NEWBY, Justice.

In this case we must decide whether an indictment charging defendant with larceny is fatally flawed because it did not specifically state that a church, the alleged co-owner of the stolen property, is an entity capable of owning property, and whether the State presented sufficient evidence of defendant's intent to commit larceny to support his conviction for felonious breaking or entering a place of worship. Because the name of a church necessarily imports an entity capable of owning property, we hold that the indictment was sufficient on its face. Furthermore, we conclude that the State presented sufficient evidence of defendant's criminal intent to commit larceny. Therefore, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals and remand this case to that court for consideration of any remaining issues.

On 8 October 2013, the Cleveland County Grand Jury indicted defendant for felony breaking or entering a place of worship and felony larceny after breaking or entering. The larceny indictment specifically alleged that, on 15 August 2012, defendant stole "a music receiver, microphones and sounds system wires, the personal property of Andy Stevens and Manna Baptist Church, ... in violation of N.C.G.S. [§ ] 14–54.1(a)." Defendant pled not guilty.

At trial, the State's evidence showed that at the conclusion of Sunday services on 19 August 2012, Pastor Andy Stevens of Manna Baptist Church discovered that some audio equipment was missing. Pastor Stevens lives on the Manna Baptist Church property. He testified that the church doors may have been inadvertently left unlocked on 15 August, following Wednesday evening services. When the church secretary arrived the next morning, she locked the doors, and they remained locked until Sunday morning. Although there was no sign of forced entry, Pastor Stevens found defendant's wallet in the baptistry changing area at the back of the church close to where some of the missing equipment previously had been located.

A detective testified that she spoke with defendant at the Cleveland County Detention Center, where he was being held on an unrelated charge. When defendant learned the detective wished to speak with him, he said, "[T]his can't possibly be good. What have I done now that I don't remember?" Defendant then admitted to being at Manna Baptist Church the night the doors were left unlocked. He said he was on "a spiritual journey" and "had done some things," but "did not remember what he had done" in the church.

At the close of the State's evidence, the trial court denied defendant's motion to dismiss the charges based on insufficient evidence. Defendant then testified on his own behalf. He stated that on the night in question, he was asked to leave the house in which he was living, so he packed a duffle bag with his clothes and started walking toward a friend's house. Along the way, he dumped the bag in a ditch because it was too heavy to carry. Defendant arrived at his friend's house around midnight. When his friend's girlfriend asked him to leave, he kept walking until he reached Manna Baptist Church. Defendant noticed that the door to the church was cracked open. He was thirsty from walking all night, so he entered the church with the intent to find water and sanctuary. Defendant stated that once inside, he prayed, slept, "tried to do a lot of soul searching," and drank a bottle of water, although he admitted he was "not really sure exactly what [he] did the whole time [he] was" in the church. He also testified that he "did not take anything away from the church" when he left at daybreak.

After leaving the church, defendant felt chest pains, so he called 9–1–1. Defendant testified that he was taking a host of medications at the time, including a psychotropic drug, for his heart condition, stress disorder,

772 S.E.2d 443

bipolar condition, and diabetes. An Emergency Medical Technician ("E.M.T.") responded to the call around 6:30 a.m. on Thursday. The E.M.T. testified that defendant said he had been "wandering all night," that defendant looked "disheveled" and "worn out," and that defendant's "shoes were actually worn through the soles." The E.M.T. did not see defendant carrying anything.

At the close of evidence, defendant renewed his motion to dismiss for insufficient evidence, which the trial court again denied. The jury found defendant guilty of felony larceny and felony breaking or entering a place of religious worship, and defendant appealed.

The Court of Appeals vacated defendant's larceny conviction and reversed his conviction for breaking or entering. State v. Campbell, –––N.C.App. ––––, ––––, 759 S.E.2d 380, 382 (2014). The Court of Appeals opined that when a larceny "indictment alleges multiple owners, one of whom is not a natural person, failure to allege that such an owner has the ability to own property is fatal to the indictment." Id. at ––––, 759 S.E.2d at 384. Therefore, the Court of Appeals...

To continue reading

Request your trial
40 cases
  • State v. Rankin, 23A18
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • December 21, 2018
    ...valid bill of indictment is essential to the jurisdiction of the trial court to try an accused for a felony." State v. Campbell , 368 N.C. 83, 86, 772 S.E.2d 440, 443 (2015) (quoting State v. Sturdivant, 304 N.C. 293, 308, 283 S.E.2d 719, 729 (1981) ). A valid indictment, among other things......
  • State v. Perkins
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • December 6, 2022
    ...omitted). "The purpose of the indictment is to give a defendant reasonable notice of the charge against his so that he may prepare for trial." Id. (citation omitted). "[A]n indictment must allege all essential elements of the offense . . ., but an indictment couched in the language of the s......
  • State v. Perkins
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • December 6, 2022
    ...omitted). "The purpose of the indictment is to give a defendant reasonable notice of the charge against his so that he may prepare for trial." Id. (citation omitted). "[A]n indictment must allege all essential elements of the offense . . ., but an indictment couched in the language of the s......
  • State v. Campbell
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • February 6, 2018
    ...review. State v. Campbell , 234 N.C.App. 551, 759 S.E.2d 380 (2014) (" Campbell COA I "), rev'd and remanded , 368 N.C. 83, 772 S.E.2d 440 (2015) (" Campbell SC I "). On remand, in our second unanimous opinion, this Court disagreed with defendant on Issue (3) but agreed with defendant on Is......
  • 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