Court Opinion

ID: 9879597
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-27 18:28:01.679066+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:47:57.952478
License: Public Domain

DIETZ, Judge, concurring.
I concur in the majority's judgment in this case. Barker argues that the State failed to establish the reliability of HGN testing at trial, as required by Rule 702(a) and McGrady . While this appeal was pending, our Supreme Court decided State v. Godwin and held that, through Rule 702(a1), "our General Assembly clearly signaled that the results of the HGN test are sufficiently reliable to be admitted into the courts of this State." 369 N.C. 604, ----, 800 S.E.2d 47, 53 (2017). In other words, Godwin held that the legislature has deemed HGN testing to be reliable as a matter of law, and therefore trial courts need not assess that reliability factor before admitting expert testimony on the issue.
I acknowledge, as Barker observes in his brief, that courts in other jurisdictions have questioned the reliability of HGN testing under standards similar to our Rule 702(a). But it is axiomatic that this Court must follow precedent from our Supreme Court. Thus, we have no choice but to reject Barker's argument. If Barker seeks to challenge the Godwin holding, he must do so in the Supreme Court.