State v. Williams
| Decision Date | 16 August 2022 |
| Docket Number | COA20-859 |
| Citation | 877 S.E.2d 105 |
| Parties | STATE of North Carolina v. Sergio Montrell WILLIAMS and Kendric Deshawn Person, Defendants. |
| Court | North Carolina Court of Appeals |
Attorney General Joshua H. Stein, by Assistant Attorneys General Erika N. Jones and Yvonne B. Ricci, for the State.
Daniel J. Dolan, for defendant-appellant Sergio Montrell Williams.
Anne Bleyman, for defendant-appellant Kendric Deshawn Person.
¶ 1 Defendants Sergio Montrell Williams and Kendric Deshawn Person were jointly tried and appeal from judgments for robbery with a dangerous weapon and felon in possession of a firearm. While only Defendant Williams properly appealed by entering his notice of appeal, we grant Defendant Person's petition for writ of certiorari.
¶ 2 On appeal, Defendant Person argues (1) the trial court denied him the right to the presumption of innocence in violation of his constitutional due process rights and North Carolina General Statute § 15A-1031 (2019) when it allowed the jury to watch a video in which he was shackled and (2) his sentences under North Carolina's Habitual Felon Act, North Carolina General Statute §§ 14-7.1 –7.6 (2019), violate his federal and state constitutional rights to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. Because the trial court gave a limiting instruction that the jury should not infer Defendant Person's guilt or innocence from watching the video and because overwhelming evidence of his guilt existed beyond the video, we conclude any error in relation to the video was not prejudicial, and we further determine § 15A-1031 does not apply. Because Defendant Person failed to raise his habitual felon status sentencing argument before the trial court, we conclude he has not preserved it for our review.
¶ 3 Turning to his appeal, Defendant Williams argues the trial court erred because (1) it failed to adequately investigate a potential conflict of interest his attorney carried from previously representing a witness for the State and (2) it intimated an opinion as to Defendant Williams's guilt by delegating a statutory obligation under North Carolina General Statute § 15A-1213 to the prosecutor. Because Defendant Williams cannot show any conflict of interest adversely affected his attorney's performance such that we would presume prejudice and cannot show any prejudice, we find no prejudicial error as to his first argument. After reviewing the totality of the circumstances, we also reject Defendant Williams's argument that the trial court delegated its duties under § 15A-1213 to the prosecutor, as he cannot show prejudice. As a result, we determine the trial court did not commit prejudicial error.
¶ 4 The State's evidence tended to show that on 6 February 2019, Taron Battle ("Mr. Battle"), his friend Brandon Deans, and his nephew Tyrell Battle went to JMS Food Mart and Grill in Rocky Mount to purchase cigars for smoking marijuana. Mr. Battle drove them to JMS in his silver Pontiac Grand Prix. Prior to going to JMS, all three individuals consumed alcohol and various drugs. While at JMS, two men approached Mr. Battle and Mr. Deans seeking to purchase marijuana. These two men were described as "a slender, brown-skinned guy with dreads in his head" and "a heavyset, kind of stocky guy." Defendant Williams was later identified as the "heavyset" individual and Defendant Person as the slender individual with "dreads in his head." Mr. Battle and Mr. Deans told Defendants they did not want to sell their marijuana.
¶ 5 Mr. Battle then entered JMS to purchase the cigars. Upon leaving JMS, he noticed Defendant Person had entered his car and was in the backseat negotiating the sale of marijuana with Mr. Battle's nephew. Defendant Person then handed a pint-sized mason jar containing marijuana to Defendant Williams through the car window. Defendant Williams then said "you-all trying to play me" and drew his gun. Defendant Person also drew his gun. Mr. Battle drew his gun in response. At this time, Tyrell Battle got out of the Pontiac and ran away. Defendant Person then took Mr. Dean's gun from the seat beside Mr. Deans and got out of the car to join Defendant Williams in taking Mr. Battle's gun. Defendants Williams and Person then left the scene together.
¶ 6 After the Defendants left, Mr. Battle and Mr. Deans drove around to look for Tyrell. While they were driving around the area, a "dark-colored car, like a sedan" slammed on the brakes in front of Mr. Battle's car, causing Mr. Battle to rear end the car. Mr. Deans identified the vehicle as a black Nissan Sentra. Defendants Williams and Person then leaned out the windows of the Nissan and opened fire on Mr. Battle and Mr. Deans. Mr. Battle followed the Nissan attempting to "do a pit maneuver" or otherwise knock the Nissan out of the way. At some point both cars stopped, and Defendants Williams and Person left their car while they continued to fire upon Mr. Battle and Mr. Deans.
¶ 7 One of the bullets struck Mr. Battle in the chest passing near his heart and puncturing his lung. Because Mr. Battle had been shot, Mr. Deans took over driving and drove Mr. Battle to the hospital. At the hospital, Detective Woods of the Rocky Mount Police Department interviewed Mr. Battle, and Mr. Battle told Detective Woods that he would not be able to identify the shooters if he saw them again. But Mr. Battle gave Detective Woods descriptions of the shooters, although at trial he could not recall the details. Due to his injuries, Mr. Battle was then airlifted to another hospital.
¶ 8 Detective Woods also interviewed Mr. Deans at the initial hospital. Mr. Deans told Detective Woods he drove Mr. Battle to the hospital following a "robbery that went bad" at JMS. Mr. Deans described the shooters as "a light-skinned black male with dreads, [with] unknown tattoos on [his] face" and "a dark-skinned male, heavyset, wearing a white tee shirt and blue and red shorts." Officers then took Mr. Deans to the police department, and he later identified Defendant Williams in an eight-person photo lineup with eighty percent certainty.
¶ 9 On the same evening, Rocky Mount Police Department officers responded directly to JMS after receiving a report of shots fired. Officer Kuhn reviewed surveillance footage from JMS security cameras and noticed one of the suspects was wearing a white shirt, black shorts, red sneakers, and a GPS ankle monitor. Officer Kuhn used BI Total Access, a GPS ankle monitoring program, and determined Defendant Williams was at JMS around the time of the shooting. Officer Kuhn located a booking photo of Defendant Williams and visually confirmed that Defendant Williams was the same person in the surveillance video. Using BI Total Access, officers located Defendant Williams and took him into custody. Defendant Williams was wearing the same shirt and shoes observed in the surveillance video.
¶ 10 Detective Woods then interviewed Defendant Williams at the police department. During the interview, Defendant Williams was wearing the same clothing described by Mr. Deans and seen in the surveillance video. Defendant Williams confessed he was at JMS and took the guns from Mr. Battle and Mr. Deans, but Defendant Williams never admitted to the shooting.
¶ 11 Defendant Person was apprehended approximately one month after the robbery and shooting. After his arrest, Defendant Person admitted to being at the JMS the night of 6 February 2019, but never admitted to participating in the shooting.
¶ 12 Based on these events, both Defendant Williams and Defendant Person were indicted on numerous charges. On or about 10 June 2019, Defendant Williams was indicted on: assault with a deadly weapon and attempted first degree murder on Mr. Deans; attempted first degree murder and assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury on Mr. Battle; possession of firearm by a felon; discharge of a weapon into occupied property inflicting serious bodily injury on Mr. Battle; and robbery with a dangerous weapon. On or about the same day, Defendant Person was indicted on: attempted first degree murder on Mr. Deans; attempted first degree murder and assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury on Mr. Battle; robbery with a dangerous weapon; discharge of a weapon into occupied property inflicting serious bodily injury on Mr. Battle; discharge of a firearm into an occupied vehicle while in operation; possession of firearm by a felon; and habitual felon status.
¶ 13 On or about 21 October 2019, the State filed superseding indictments against both Defendants. Defendant Williams was indicted on: discharge of a weapon into occupied property inflicting serious bodily injury on Mr. Battle; robbery with a dangerous weapon on both Mr. Battle and Mr. Deans; and discharge of a weapon into an occupied vehicle while in operation on both Mr. Battle and Mr. Deans. Defendant Person was indicted on the same charges except for discharge of a weapon into an occupied vehicle.
¶ 14 These charges came for trial starting 6 January 2020. During trial, the State presented evidence as recounted above. During the course of trial, on or about 13 and 14 January 2020, the State dismissed Defendant Williams's charges of assault with a deadly weapon and discharge of a firearm into an occupied vehicle while in operation. Neither of the Defendants presented evidence at trial.
¶ 15 The jury found Defendant Williams guilty of possession of a firearm by a felon and robbery with a dangerous weapon as to Mr. Battle but acquitted Defendant Williams of the attempted first degree murder as to Mr. Battle and as to Mr. Deans, assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury and its lesser included offense as to Mr. Battle, discharge of a weapon in a vehicle while in operation causing serious bodily injury as to Mr. Battle, and robbery with a dangerous weapon as to Mr. Deans. Pursuant to the not guilty verdicts, on or about 14 January 2020, the trial...
To continue reading
Request your trial