Court Opinion

ID: 9586437
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 23:11:03.472912+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:31:14.011363
License: Public Domain

Pless, J.,
dissenting: The driver of a get-away car plays an important part in a robbery, and he seldom commits any overt act to show his participation in, or knowledge of, the robbery. He merely sits in the car, usually with the motor running; but where he is an actual confederate his presence gives encouragement to the active perpetrators, which makes him responsible.
In State v. Allison, 200 N.C. 190, 156 S.E. 547, it is said:
“ ‘Where the bystander is a friend of the perpetrator and knows that his presence will be regarded by the perpetrator as an encouragement and protection, presence alone may be regarded as encouraging.’ ”
The evidence showed the association of Shadrick and Aycoth over a period of many hours on the day in question. This would be some indication of the friendship of the two men. A person’s knowledge can seldom be shown except by circumstances, and I am of the opinion that the circumstances shown here are sufficient to import knowledge to Shadrick.
Shadrick rode to the scene of the robbery with Aycoth. The fact that he was sitting on the right front seat of the car is not, in my opinion, a controlling factor. He could easily change sides to the driver’s seat when his confederate came back. The State’s evidence was to the effect that Shadrick was in the same car later that night- and was seen to get out from the left, or the driver’s side. While the victim did not see Shadrick look toward the store, she testified he could have seen her while she was being robbed and that she saw him well enough that she could identify him. When the car was later searched, a loaded pistol was found under the left front seat and another was found under the right front seat. This fact plus his presence within eight feet of the store and his arrival and departure with the robber are, in my opinion, sufficient to submit the case to the jury. That is usually all that can be shown as to the get-away driver, and the jury has adopted the common-sense view that Shad-rick didn’t come along “just for the ride.”
I am afraid the majority opinion describes a course of conduct for the drivers in these cases whereby they can be absolved of blame. I dissent.