State v. Mooneyhan

• Decision Date: 05 November 1991
• Docket Number: No. 907SC1101,907SC1101
• Citation: 409 S.E.2d 700,104 N.C.App. 477
• Parties: STATE of North Carolina v. Johnny Ray MOONEYHAN.
• Court: North Carolina Court of Appeals

Page 700

409 S.E.2d 700

104 N.C.App. 477

STATE of North Carolina v. Johnny Ray MOONEYHAN.

No. 907SC1101.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Nov. 5, 1991.

Atty. Gen., Lacy H. Thornburg, by Asst. Atty. Gen., Linda Anne Morris, Raleigh, for the State.

Farris & Farris, P.A., by Robert A. Farris, Jr., Wilson, and Thomas J. Farris, Raleigh, for defendant, appellant.

HEDRICK, Chief Judge.

Defendant's first assignment of error is that the trial court erred by denying defendant's motion to dismiss at the close of all evidence because the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to support all the elements necessary for a conviction. Defendant argues that the State failed to prove that he was driving the motor vehicle when the accident occurred.

In ruling on a motion to dismiss for insufficiency of evidence in a criminal case, all evidence admitted, whether competent or incompetent, must be considered in the light most favorable to the State. The State is entitled to every reasonable inference therefrom, and inconsistencies or contradictions are disregarded. The credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be given their testimony is exclusively a matter for the jury. State v. Scott, 323 N.C. 350, 372 S.E.2d 572 (1988). The motion for dismissal presents to the court the questions of whether there is substantial evidence of each essential element of the crime charged or of a lesser included offense, and whether the defendant was the perpetrator of the offense. Substantial evidence is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. If there is such substantial evidence, the motion for dismissal should be denied. State v. Williams, 307 N.C. 452, 298 S.E.2d 372 (1983).

In this case, evidence by the State tended to show that on the evening of 25 January 1990, defendant drove his red and white pickup truck to a nightclub around 5:30 p.m. A witness at the club estimates that defendant drank three beers in the hour and a half that he was at the club. Defendant then drove his truck approximately one mile to the Tarboro Moose Lodge, where he had dinner, and drank approximately four more beers over the course of about three hours. At around 10:00 p.m., a witness saw defendant preparing to leave the lodge, and warned him not to drive home because of the weather and his consumption of alcohol during the evening. Defendant told the witness: "I can make it. I am leaving." The witness further testified that defendant then left the lodge...