State v. Mahatha
| Decision Date | 03 September 2019 |
| Docket Number | No. COA18-734,COA18-734 |
| Citation | 832 S.E.2d 914 |
| Parties | STATE of North Carolina v. Cory Antwon MAHATHA, Defendant. |
| Court | North Carolina Court of Appeals |
Attorney General Joshua H. Stein, by Assistant Attorney General Forrest P. Fallanca, for the State-Appellee.
Morgan & Carter PLLC, by Michelle F. Lynch, for the Defendant-Appellant.
Defendant Cory Antwon Mahatha appeals from judgment entered upon a jury’s verdicts finding him guilty of felony speeding to elude arrest and attaining habitual felon status. After careful review, we conclude that the trial court failed to provide adequate information to ensure that Defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to be represented by counsel. We therefore vacate Defendant’s convictions and judgment and grant a new trial.
On 28 March 2017, Detective Patrick Schmeltzer of the Rowan County Sheriff’s Office was assigned to the crime reduction unit in the Airport Road area. Schmeltzer, accompanied by Detective Cody Trexler and Deputy Naturile, patrolled the area in an unmarked black Chevrolet Tahoe. Schmeltzer received a "be on the lookout" ("BOLO") from his supervisor, Sergeant Weston, who radioed that an assault had occurred and that the suspect vehicle, a white Dodge Challenger, was heading his way. Schmeltzer pulled his vehicle onto the shoulder, waited, and spotted a white Dodge Challenger drive past him. Schmeltzer pulled onto the highway and followed the vehicle for some distance but did not observe Defendant speed, commit any traffic violations, or engage in suspicious behavior. Schmeltzer activated the Tahoe’s blue lights and siren in order to initiate a traffic stop of the vehicle.
Defendant was driving the white Dodge Challenger but did not pull over when Schmeltzer activated the Tahoe’s blue lights and siren. Instead, Defendant maintained a speed of approximately 45 miles per hour and continued driving until he reached South Main Street. Once Defendant reached South Main Street, he turned right and accelerated to speeds of 90-100 miles per hour. The officers pursued Defendant onto South Main Street and witnessed Defendant: cross into turn lanes and onto the shoulder of the road in order to pass other vehicles; "almost wreck" before swerving back into traffic; fish-tail across lanes; pass over the double-yellow lines; and turn into oncoming traffic.
Defendant next drove through an intersection, failed to stop at a stop sign, and pulled his car into a driveway; he then took off on foot and ran into a cow pasture. Schmeltzer and Naturile pursued Defendant on foot, discovered him hiding in a ditch, and took Defendant into custody. Upon searching Defendant, the officers found $3000 on his person and later found a small amount of marijuana inside Defendant’s vehicle.
On 15 May 2017, a grand jury indicted Defendant for felony speeding to elude arrest in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-141.5(B) (2017). On 12 June 2017, a grand jury indicted Defendant for having attained habitual felon status in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-7.1 (2017).
On 11 September 2017, Defendant was arraigned in Rowan County Superior Court. The trial court told Defendant of the crimes with which he was charged: "obtaining the status of a habitual felon; possession of a firearm by a felon; attempted robbery with a firearm; fleeing to allude arrest; driving while license revoked, not an impaired revocation; and assaulting a female." The trial court asked Defendant whether he wished to have a lawyer represent him, to which Defendant replied that he was going to represent himself. The trial court also asked Defendant if he understood how much time he was facing and told him that he was "looking at ... 231 months." At the end of his arraignment, Defendant entered a plea of not guilty.
On 23 January 2018, prior to the start of Defendant’s jury trial, the State dismissed the charges of driving while license revoked, not an impaired revocation; assault on a female; possession of a firearm by a felon; and attempted robbery with a dangerous weapon. The State proceeded to trial on the charges of speeding to elude arrest and attaining habitual felon status.
On 24 January 2018, the jury returned verdicts finding Defendant guilty of both charges. The trial court entered judgment upon the jury’s verdicts, sentencing Defendant to a term of 97 months’ to 129 months’ imprisonment. From entry of judgment, Defendant gave proper notice of appeal.
Defendant argues that the trial court erred (1) in failing to dismiss the charge of speeding to elude arrest where there was no evidence that the officer was lawfully performing his duties at the time of the traffic stop and (2) by allowing Defendant to represent himself when his waiver of counsel was not valid and by later denying his request for appointed counsel.
Defendant first argues that the trial court erred in failing to dismiss the charge of speeding to elude arrest when there was no evidence that Schmeltzer was lawfully performing his duties when he initiated an investigatory traffic stop of Defendant. Defendant’s argument is misplaced.
In considering whether to grant a motion to dismiss for insufficiency of the evidence, the trial court must determine (1) whether the State offered substantial evidence of each essential element of the offense charged, whether direct, circumstantial, or both, and (2) whether the defendant is the perpetrator of the offense. State v. Fritsch , 351 N.C. 373, 378, 526 S.E.2d 451, 455 (2000). Substantial evidence is relevant evidence "that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." State v. Lambert , 341 N.C. 36, 42, 460 S.E.2d 123, 127 (1995) (citation omitted). "[T]he evidence presented must be considered in the light most favorable to the State, and the State is entitled to every reasonable inference to be drawn therefrom." Id . A trial court’s denial of a motion to dismiss for insufficient evidence is reviewed de novo . State v. Bagley , 183 N.C. App. 514, 523, 644 S.E.2d 615, 621 (2007).
The crime of speeding to elude arrest is defined as operating "a motor vehicle on a street, highway, or public vehicular area while fleeing or attempting to elude a law enforcement officer who is in the lawful performance of his duties." N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-141.5(a) (2017). While a violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-141.5 is ordinarily a misdemeanor, the offense is a felony if two or more aggravating factors are present, including speeding in excess of 15 miles per hour over the legal speed limit and reckless driving as proscribed by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-140. See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-141.5(b) (2017). Thus, for purposes of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-141.5, an individual’s guilt hinges upon the extent to which he attempts to flee from an officer who is lawfully performing his official duties. State v. Sinclair , 191 N.C. App. 485, 489-90, 663 S.E.2d 866, 870 (2008).
State v. Hernandez , 208 N.C. App. 591, 597, 704 S.E.2d 55, 59 (2010) (quotation marks and citations omitted). "[B]rief investigatory detentions such as those involved in the stopping of a vehicle" are subject to Fourth Amendment protections. State v. Watkins , 337 N.C. 437, 441, 446 S.E.2d 67, 70 (1994) (citation omitted). "A police officer may effect a brief investigatory seizure of an individual where the officer has reasonable, articulable suspicion that a crime may be underway." State v. Barnard , 184 N.C. App. 25, 29, 645 S.E.2d 780, 783 (2007) (citation omitted).
A seizure occurs "when the officer, by means of physical force or show of authority, has in some way restrained the liberty of a citizen." Terry v. Ohio , 392 U.S. 1, 19 n.16, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968). There must be "a physical application of force or submission to a show of authority" for a seizure to be found. State v. Cuevas , 121 N.C. App. 553, 563, 468 S.E.2d 425, 431 (1996) (citation omitted). However, a simple show of authority by law enforcement does not rise to the level of a seizure unless the suspect submits to that show of authority. California v. Hodari D. , 499 U.S. 621, 626, 111 S.Ct. 1547, 113 L.Ed.2d 690 (1991) ; see State v. Mangum , 250 N.C. App. 714, 726, 795 S.E.2d 106, 116-17 (2016) ().
Accordingly, this Court considers the totality of the circumstances, both before and after an officer signals his intention to stop a defendant, in determining whether there was reasonable suspicion of criminal activity to justify a traffic stop. Id. The reasonable suspicion "must be based on specific and articulable facts, as well as the rational inferences from those facts, as viewed through the eyes of a reasonable, cautious officer, guided by his experience and training[,]" Watkins , 337 N.C. at 441, 446 S.E.2d at 70, and we must consider "the whole picture in determining whether a reasonable suspicion exists to justify an officer’s investigatory traffic stop." State v. Jones , 813 S.E.2d 668, 670 (N.C. Ct. App. 2018) (quotation marks and citation omitted).
Defendant argues that he was seized at the moment Schmeltzer activated his blue lights, but Defendant’s argument is without merit. Schmeltzer’s activation of his blue lights was merely a show of authority and an order to stop. Mangum , 250 N.C. App. at 726, 795 S.E.2d at 116-17. As Defendant did not heed this order and pull over, he did not submit to Schmeltzer’s show of authority; therefore, Defendant was not seized at the time Schmeltzer activated his blue lights. Id. Instead, Defendant was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Thompson
...detentions such as those involved in the stopping of a vehicle’ are subject to Fourth Amendment protections." Mahatha , 267 N.C. App. at 358, 832 S.E.2d at 918 (quoting State v. Watkins , 337 N.C. 437, 441, 446 S.E.2d 67, 70 (1994) ). "A police officer may effect a brief investigatory seizu......
-
State v. Morrow
...530, 533, 838 S.E.2d 439, 444 (2020). We also review alleged violations of N.C. Gen. Stat § 15A-1242de novo. State v. Mahatha , 267 N.C. App. 355, 360, 832 S.E.2d 914, 919 (2019).¶ 6 A defendant's right to counsel is constitutionally protected at the federal and state levels. See U.S. Const......