Opinion
No. COA12–617.
2012-11-20
STATE of North Carolina v. Rafiq Naji AMIR.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Special Deputy Attorney General Scott T. Slusser, for the State. Gilda C. Rodriguez, for defendant-appellant.
Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 21 September 2011 by Judge Joseph E. Turner in Moore County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 5 November 2012. Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Special Deputy Attorney General Scott T. Slusser, for the State. Gilda C. Rodriguez, for defendant-appellant.
CALABRIA, Judge.
Rafiq Naji Amir (“defendant”) appeals from a judgment entered upon a jury verdict finding him guilty of attempted robbery with a dangerous weapon and his plea of guilty to attaining the status of an habitual felon. We find no error.
On 15 November 2009, Robert Greenleaf (“Greenleaf”) was walking to a BP gas station in downtown Southern Pines, North Carolina, when he heard someone yell out behind him, asking for money. As Greenleaf continued walking, defendant approached him from behind and demanded that Greenleaf give him money. When Greenleaf turned to face defendant, he saw that defendant was holding a roofer's hook blade knife in his right hand. Greenleaf yelled at defendant, who retreated and ran across the street.
Defendant was arrested and indicted for robbery with a dangerous weapon and attaining the status of an habitual felon. Beginning 19 September 2011, defendant was tried by a jury in Moore County Superior Court for the offense of attempted robbery with a dangerous weapon. At the close of the State's evidence and at the close of all evidence, defendant made a motion to dismiss, which was denied by the trial court.
On 21 September 2011, the jury returned a verdict finding defendant guilty of attempted robbery with a dangerous weapon. Defendant then pled guilty to attaining the status of an habitual felon. The trial court sentenced defendant to a minimum term of 135 months and a maximum term of 171 months in the North Carolina Department of Correction. Defendant appeals.
Defendant's sole argument on appeal is that the trial court erred by denying his motion to dismiss the charge of attempted robbery with a dangerous weapon. We disagree.
Our review of the trial court's denial of a motion to dismiss consists of determining whether there is substantial evidence (1) to establish each essential element of the offense charged, or of a lesser offense included therein, and (2) to prove the defendant perpetrated the offense. State v. Scott, 356 N.C. 591, 595, 573 S.E.2d 866, 868 (2002). We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, giving the State the benefit of all reasonable inferences which may be drawn from the evidence. State v. Benson, 331 N.C. 537, 544, 417 S.E.2d 756, 761 (1992).
“An attempted robbery with a dangerous weapon occurs when a person, with the specific intent to unlawfully deprive another of personal property by endangering or threatening his life with a dangerous weapon, does some overt act calculated to bring about this result.” State v. Allison, 319 N.C. 92, 96, 352 S.E.2d 420, 423 (1987). Thus, a defendant may be found guilty of attempted robbery with a dangerous weapon “even when the defendant neither demands nor takes money from the victim.” State v. Taylor, 362 N.C. 514, 539, 669 S.E.2d 239, 261 (2008).
Defendant contends the court erred by denying his motion to dismiss because there was insufficient evidence of an intent to rob Greenleaf. “Felonious intent is an essential element of the offense of armed robbery and of the attempt to commit armed robbery. Felonious intent means the intent to permanently deprive the owner of his property.” State v. Wheeler, 122 N.C.App. 653, 656, 471 S.E.2d 636, 639 (1996)(internal citation omitted). Our Supreme Court has stated that “[i]ntent is an attitude or emotion of the mind and is seldom, if ever, susceptible of proof by direct evidence, it must ordinarily be proven by circumstantial evidence, i.e., by facts and circumstances from which it may be inferred.” State v. Gammons, 260 N.C. 753, 756, 133 S.E.2d 649, 651 (1963).
In the instant case, the State presented evidence that defendant demanded money from Greenleaf while displaying a dangerous weapon, a roofing blade knife. Defendant's demand provided sufficient evidence that he intended “to permanently deprive [Greenleaf] of his property.” Wheeler, 122 N.C.App. at 656, 471 S.E.2d at 639. Thus, the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to dismiss. This argument is overruled.
Defendant received a fair trial, free from error.
No error. Judges HUNTER, ROBERT C. and McCULLOUGH concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).