State v. Locklear, 363 N.C. 438

Summary

The Supreme Court of North Carolina affirmed defendant Dane Locklear Jr.'s convictions for first-degree murder and related offenses, finding no reversible error in the guilt-innocence phase. The court held that evidence concerning a separate murder was admissible under North Carolina Rule of Evidence 404(b), and that Confrontation Clause violations involving non-testifying forensic witnesses were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The court vacated the death sentence and remanded for a new sentencing hearing.

Holdings

1. The trial court properly admitted evidence of defendant's prior murder of Cynthia Wheeler because the evidence was relevant to purposes other than propensity, including motive, intent, knowledge, plan, opportunity, and modus operandi, and the offenses shared significant similarities.
2. Admission of forensic opinions concerning Wheeler's cause of death and identification of her remains, through testimony by a different witness, violated defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him.
3. Defendant was not entitled to an instruction on second-degree murder because the evidence supported premeditation and deliberation and did not negate those elements.
4. In a capital case where the jury considers whether the defendant is mentally retarded, the trial court must instruct, when properly requested, that a finding of mental retardation makes the case noncapital and results in a sentence of life imprisonment without parole. The trial court's failure to give that instruction prejudiced defendant.
5. North Carolina's short-form indictment for first-degree murder was constitutionally valid.

Questions Presented

1. Whether evidence of defendant's prior killing of Cynthia Wheeler was admissible under North Carolina Rule of Evidence 404(b), despite the offenses having been tried separately.
2. Whether admission of evidence concerning defendant's prior convictions and drug-related conduct constituted reversible error.
3. Whether admission of autopsy and dental-identification opinions through a nontestifying pathologist and dentist violated the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause and, if so, whether the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
4. Whether redirect examination concerning a letter allegedly sent by defendant was properly admitted to rebut impeachment evidence.
5. Whether defendant was entitled to a second-degree-murder instruction.
6. Whether felonious assault could serve as the underlying felony for felony murder.
7. Whether defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel based on alleged disclosure of privileged information and delay.
8. Whether the trial judge should have recused himself.
9. Whether alleged jury-selection errors required a new trial or new sentencing hearing.
10. Whether the trial court was required to instruct the jury that a finding of mental retardation would result in life imprisonment without parole.
11. Whether North Carolina's short-form murder indictment was constitutionally valid.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded