In State of North Carolina vs. Peter Stevenson (COA25-1035), a case out of Durham County, Mr. Stevenson raises two issues on appeal. First he asserts that the trial court erred by instructing the jury on the aggressor doctrine. Second, he argues that the trial court erred by allowing the admission of lay opinion testimony from a police investigator. In this published opinion, the North Carolina Court of Appeals found no grounds for reversible error.
Mr. Steveson was sixty-six years old and lived in an apartment with his wife. He and his wife had an ongoing dispute with their neighbor over their neighbor’s loud music. They had complained to the apartment complex and the Durham police about the noise. One evening in September of 2023, Mr. Stevenson planned to take his dog for a walk. He carried his knife with him for protection. Before starting his walk, the neighbor began playing loud music. Mr. Stevenson decided to go speak with the neighbor. He knocked on the neighbor’s door for several minutes but received no response. As he turned to walk away, the neighbor opened the door and yelled something to the effect of “get the f**k off my porch.” During his trial, Mr. Stevenson testified that the neighbor jumped towards him, swung, and hit Mr. Stevenson on his chin. Mr. Stevenson grabbed his knife and swung it once at the neighbor. The neighbor began bleeding from his neck.
The neighbor also testified at the trial. The neighbor testified that Mr. Stevenson was banging at his door and that he observed Mr. Stevenson through his peephole “looking agitated.” The neighbor testified that he answered the door in order to tell Mr. Stevenson to leave. The neighbor claims that he never attempted to touch Mr. Stevenson and denied making contact with his chin. The neighbor exclaimed to Mr. Stevenson, “did you seriously just f***ing stab me?”. To this, according to the neighbor, Mr. Stevenson replied, “I told you to stop f***ing with me with this music.”
The neighbor called 911 and Mr. Stevenson returned to his apartment where he also called 911. Mr. Stevenson reported that he had stabbed his neighbor but he also stated that he was concerned that his neighbor would get a weapon and retaliate. The neighbor received medical treatment at Duke Hospital. The neighbor had suffered a torn artery that could not be safely repaired. The artery was cauterized and he experienced no further complications.
Mr. Stevenson was charged with and indicted for assault with a deadly weapon with the intent to kill inflicting serious injury. Mr. Stevenson’s trial took place in October of 2024. Mr. Stevenson argued that he acted in self-defense and the jury received a self-defense instruction including an instruction on the aggressor doctrine. Mr. Stevenson did not object to the jury instructions. The jury found Mr. Stevenson guilty of the lesser included offense of assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury. Mr. Stevenson filed notice of appeal.
Recent Comments