Summary
Distinguishing Cooke , and holding evidence was sufficient to require an instruction on the defense of necessity: "[W]e do not agree with the State that the result in this case is controlled by State v. Cooke . In Cooke , the defendant was stopped by police after ‘he had been driving on different public highways for about thirty minutes.’ We held that although the ‘evidence tends to show that defendant was justifiably in fear for his safety when he drove away from his pedestrian pursuers,’ there was no evidence that ‘he was still justifiably fearful thirty minutes later after his pursuers had been left many miles behind.’ In this case, defendant was stopped by Officer Mobley about three blocks from Mr. Cayson's house and within five minutes of leaving. Cooke is factually distinguishable and does not control the outcome of the present case."
Summary of this case from State v. MillerOpinion
No. COA13–1236.
2014-05-20
Attorney General Roy Cooper by Special Deputy Attorney General Neil Dalton for the State. Richard J. Costanza for defendant-appellant.