Court: Court of Appeals of North Carolina; December 21, 2004; North Carolina; State Appellate Court
A jury convicted the defendant of felonious child abuse resulting in serious physical injury, classified as a Class E felony, leading to a sentence of twenty-nine to forty-four months. The case arose from an incident on May 16, 2003, when eleven-month-old T.P. was brought to the emergency room with a spiral fracture in his right femur. Orthopaedic surgeon Dr. William B. Wheatley suspected abuse due to the injury's nature and T.P.'s age. At the time of the injury, T.P.'s mother, Abbey, left him with the defendant, who claimed that he discovered T.P. injured after hearing a crash while he was outside. The defendant's explanation involved T.P. allegedly climbing in his crib and falling. Abbey, initially believing in the defendant's innocence despite his prior misdemeanor child abuse conviction, later admitted to police that the defendant had been alone with T.P. when the injury occurred. During police interviews, the defendant denied knowledge of the incident but ultimately confessed to lying about the circumstances out of fear stemming from his previous conviction. He later stated that he falsely attributed T.P.'s injury to an accidental fall while trying to crawl out of the crib.
Defendant admitted that on May 16, 2003, he left T.P. in his crib while attempting to place him in a walker, resulting in a leg injury after he heard a snap. He claimed he did not intend to harm T.P. and supported a false narrative created by Abbey about T.P. falling from the crib to avoid trouble. The court denied his motion to dismiss at the end of the evidence presentation.
Defendant challenged the admission of evidence regarding his previous child abuse under Rule 404(b) of the Rules of Evidence, arguing that he did not claim T.P.'s injury was accidental and that he did not intend to cause harm. However, the court found that he failed to preserve the issue for appellate review since he did not object to the testimony when first presented. Abbey and Casey testified about the prior incident involving L., and the defendant's acknowledgment of his misdemeanor child abuse plea further solidified the evidence against him. The court ruled that the evidence was properly admitted to show the absence of accident, rendering his assignment of error meritless.
Defendant's second assignment of error claims the trial court wrongly denied his motion to dismiss due to a lack of evidence for "serious bodily injury" and insufficient proof of intent to injure T.P. The court reviews such denials by assessing if evidence, favorably viewed for the State, could lead a reasonable juror to find the defendant guilty of the charged offense or a lesser included offense. Defendant was indicted for the Class C felony of child abuse inflicting "serious bodily injury" but was convicted of a lesser Class E felony for inflicting "serious physical injury." The trial court determined there was no evidence supporting the greater offense and therefore did not submit it to the jury.
To secure a felony child abuse conviction, the State must establish that the defendant is a caretaker of a child under 16, intentionally inflicted serious physical injury or committed assault on the child, and that the abuse resulted in serious physical injury. Specific intent to inflict serious injury is not required, only the intent to assault or injure. "Serious physical injury" is defined as causing great pain and suffering. In this case, substantial evidence indicated that T.P., an infant, sustained a spiral femur fracture while solely in the defendant's care. Dr. Wheatley characterized the injury as a rotational fracture, which the defendant attempted to explain away with inconsistent stories, including a prior child abuse incident. Testimony revealed contradictions to the defendant’s claims about how T.P. was injured. The severity of T.P.'s injury, requiring surgery and a full-body cast, met the statutory definition of "serious physical injury."
Additionally, the defendant identified a clerical mistake in the judgment, which incorrectly stated a conviction for "serious bodily injury" instead of the correct "serious physical injury." The court is directed to correct this error. In the third assignment of error, the defendant abandoned a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, requesting to dismiss it without prejudice for potential future raising. Due to the lack of specifics regarding counsel's deficiencies, the court could not evaluate the claim on direct appeal and declined to address its procedural status if raised later. The appellate court found no prejudicial error and remanded for the correction of the clerical error in the judgment. Judges HUNTER and ELMORE concurred.
