State v. Blanks
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. NO. COA14-282 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 19 August 2014 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. Bladen County No. 12CRS50891 BILLY GENE BLANKS, Defendant. Appeal by defendant from judgment entered on or about 26 September 2013 by Judge Thomas H. Lock in Bladen County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 11 August 2014. Attorney General Roy A. Cooper III, by Assistant Attorney General Thomas D. Henry, for the State. Winifred H. Dillon for defendant-appellant. STROUD, Judge. Defendant Billy Gene Blanks appeals from the judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of misdemeanor fleeing to elude arrest, speeding in excess of 55 miles per hour, reckless driving so as to endanger any person or property, and failure to heed a law enforcement officer s light or siren. prejudicial error. We find no -2While performing other duties on 14 April 2012, Bladen County Sheriff s Department Deputy Chris Brisson saw defendant drive by in a black BMW. Deputy Brisson recognized defendant and knew he had outstanding warrants, so he began to pursue defendant. Deputy Brisson and Deputy defendant s car and ceased pursuit. lane Brisson for and When the cars reached 120 miles per hour, defendant line the lights traffic. county into blue accelerated the drove his defendant crossed and activated lost oncoming sight of The speed limit on the highway was 55 miles per hour. Deputy Brisson returned to the area where the chase began and encountered defendant s son, who informed him that defendant had been cutting the grass at his home in the area earlier that day. Deputy Brisson drove past defendant s son s home, and saw a black BMW parked on the property. The car s hood and tires were warm, indicating it had recently been driven. At trial, defendant testified that he owned a black BMW at the time of the incident, but stated that he was out of the state on 12 April 2012. Defendant s son testified that defendant left the BMW at his home when he traveled, and denied telling Deputy Brisson that defendant had cut his grass on the day of the chase. The jury found defendant guilty of -3misdemeanor fleeing to elude arrest, speeding in excess of 55 miles per hour, reckless driving so as to endanger, and failure to heed an consolidated officer s the light convictions defendant to 90 days in jail. In his sole argument on and into siren. one The judgment trial and court sentenced Defendant gave notice of appeal. appeal, defendant contends the trial court erred when it overruled his objection to a question posed by the prosecutor Deputy Brisson. On County who at Sheriff s her redirect examination the time defense of Department, trial about counsel worked the questioned for the Q. Okay, [the prosecutor] previously brought this up and then I will hush. You were previously employed here, weren t you? Yes, sir. Q. Okay. now? A. And you are with Brunswick right Yes, sir. Q. Did -- you were in fact terminated from Bladen County? A. No, sir. Deputy Brunswick circumstances departure from Bladen County: A. of We do not agree. cross-examination, Brisson, during of his -4The trial court sustained the State s objection to the final question. On redirect, the prosecutor asked Deputy Brisson to clarify the circumstances of his employment change: Q. Did you choose to go work in Brunswick County? A. Yes, ma am. I had an application on file for [a] previous amount of time and they had some new positions and they called and said I had a job if I wanted it. Q. So you were not terminated? A. No, ma am. Q. So [defense counsel s] rude accusation that you were terminated is incorrect? A. Yes, ma am. Defense counsel objected to the prosecutor s final question, and the trial court overruled the objection. that the prejudiced disparaging his nature of the that it affected asking of the defense Defendant contends prosecutor s the question outcome so of the will not trial. Ordinarily, the result in prejudice to the defendant. question alone State v. Campbell, 296 N.C. 394, 399, 250 S.E.2d 228, 231 (1979) (citations omitted). Accordingly, to prevail on appeal based on his objection to the content of a prosecutor s question, a defendant must demonstrate a reasonable possibility that the question affected the -5outcome of his case. State v. Whisenant, 308 N.C. 791, 794, 303 S.E.2d 784, 786 (1983). Here, even characterization defendant prejudice. were of cannot we to assume that defense counsel as demonstrate that the the rude prosecutor s was question improper, caused him Deputy Brisson testified at trial and had first-hand knowledge of the alleged criminal acts. Although he denied committing the acts, defendant confirmed that he owned a car that matched the description of the car Deputy Brisson observed and pursued, and Deputy Brisson defendant s son s house, still warm. found the car parked at In light of this evidence, defendant simply cannot demonstrate that an isolated accusation that his attorney asked a rude question possibly affected the outcome of this trial. NO PREJUDICIAL ERROR. Judges BRYANT and HUNTER, JR., Robert N. concur. Report per Rule 30(e).
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
