Case ID: nc-app_9/html/0456-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mallard, C.J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ROGER DALE LAND
    No. 7022SC480
    (Filed 16 September 1970)
    Appeal by defendant from Seay, J., 26 January 1970 Criminal Session of Superior Court held in Davidson County.
    The defendant was tried upon a bill of indictment charging him with first-degree burglary. Upon the call of the case for trial, he pleaded not guilty and trial was by jury.
    The evidence for the State in part tended to show that the prosecuting witness, Mrs. Bobby Dockery, alone in her house, was awakened during the night of 24 August 1969 by a noise. She went to the den to get a gun where she was grabbed by the defendant who threatened her with a knife or a straight razor. She asked what he wanted, and he replied, “I’m just going to show you a good time.” The defendant proceeded to make sexual advances and kissed Mrs. Dockery several times while she protested. There was a knock at the front door followed by a knock at the back door. Mrs. Dockery went to the back door and found some police officers there. The officers discovered the defendant in a bedroom hiding under the bed. There was also evidence that a screen had been cut and entry made into the house through a window. A neighbor across the street had seen a man enter through the window, had heard Mrs. Dockery cry out in alarm, and had called the police.
    The defendant offered no evidence and at the close of the evidence for the State moved for judgment as of nonsuit, which was overruled.
    
      The jury returned a verdict of guilty of breaking or entering with intent to commit the felony of rape, and from judgment imposing sentence, the defendant appealed.
    
      Attorney General Morgan and Staff Attorney Sauls for the State.
    
    
      Clarence C. Boyan for defendant appellant.
    
   Mallard, C.J.

The defendant noted over fifty exceptions to the ruling of the trial judge and to portions of the charge to the jury, but on examination we find none of them of substantial merit.

The evidence was sufficient to support the verdict, and in the trial we find no prejudicial error.

No Error.

Parker and Hedrick, JJ., concur.