State v. Simmons
| Decision Date | 20 July 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 774SC177,774SC177 |
| Citation | 236 S.E.2d 188,33 N.C.App. 705 |
| Parties | STATE of North Carolina v. Levi SIMMONS, Joe Louis Simmons and Timothy Bolden. |
| Court | North Carolina Court of Appeals |
Joseph C. Olschner, Jacksonville, for defendant-appellant Levi simmons.
Grady Mercer, Jr., Jacksonville, for defendant-appellant Joe Louis Simmons.
Billy G. Sandlin, Jacksonville, for defendant-appellant Timothy Bolden.
Counsel for defendant Timothy Bolden concedes in his brief that he can find no error, but requests this court to review the record. Since no assignments of error are brought forward and argued in defendant's brief, no question is presented for review. State v. McMorris, 290 N.C. 286, 225 S.E.2d 553 (1976). The defendant Timothy Bolden had a fair trial free from prejudicial error.
Defendants, Levi Simmons and Joe Louis Simmons, contend the court erred in denying their motions for judgment as of nonsuit. When all the evidence is considered in the light most favorable to the State, it is obviously sufficient to require submission of the cases to the jury, and to support the verdicts.
Defendant, Joe Louis Simmons, contends the court erred in denying his motion to suppress Nola's and Wasson's in court identification of him as one of the robbers. Defendant argues that the in court identification was tainted by impermissibly suggestive pre-trial identification procedures. The trial court held a voir dire to determine the admissibility of the witnesses' in court identifications. At voir dire the State offered evidence tending to show the following:
On 17 June 1976 Nola and Wasson were the victims of a robbery by four black males on Kerr Street in Jacksonville. The area was well lighted with street lights. The victims gave police officers a description of their assailants, and later that evening were taken to the police station and shown defendant Joe Simmons' photograph along with several other photographs. Wasson identified defendant's photograph as that of one of the alleged robbers. Nola was unable to identify defendant's photograph. Wasson observed defendant in a "show up" but was unable at that time to identify him as one of the robbers. Defendant who had not been placed under arrest was released. Later in the evening Nola and Wasson were being driven back to the Camp LeJeune in a military van when they saw all three defendants walking beside the street. Upon seeing the three defendants together both Wasson and Nola recognized the defendants as the robbers. The police subsequently arrested the defendants. Both victims identified defendant in court as one of the robbers.
After voir dire the court found the facts to be substantially as set out above and concluded that the witnesses' in court identification of Joe Louis Simmons "was based on their observations of the defendant at the time of the robbery, his clothing . . . and subsequent observation of the defendant just shortly before he was arrested."
The findings and conclusions made by the trial court upon voir dire are conclusive on appeal if supported by competent evidence. State v. Tuggle, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Barnes, COA95-739
...e.g., State v. Young, 305 N.C. 391, 289 S.E.2d 374 (1982); State v. Washington, 51 N.C.App. 458, 276 S.E.2d 470 (1981); State v. Simmons, 33 N.C.App. 705, 236 S.E.2d 188, cert. denied, 293 N.C. 592, 238 S.E.2d 151 (1977); State v. Massey, 273 N.C. 721, 161 S.E.2d 103 (1968); State v. Skippe......
- State v. Nichols, 7716SC232
-
State v. Simmons
...Gen., Elizabeth C. Bunting, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State. Petition by defendant Joe Louis Simmons for writ of certiorari. N.C.App., 236 S.E.2d 188. ...