For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals.
REVERSED.
State v. Wilkerson, 356 N.C. 418 (2002)
Nov. 22, 2002
·
Supreme Court of North Carolina
·
No. 124A02
356 N.C. 418
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. RONNIE HAYZE WILKERSON
No. 124A02
(Filed 22 November 2002)
Evidence— bare fact of prior convictions — absence of testimony by defendant — prejudicial error
The decision of the Court of Appeals affirming defendant’s convictions for possession with intent to sell or deliver cocaine and trafficking in cocaine is reversed for the reason stated in the dissenting opinion that the trial court committed prejudicial error in permitting the State to introduce, through the testimony of a deputy clerk of court, the bare fact of defendant’s prior convictions for cocaine offenses to show knowledge and intent when defendant did not testify.
Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 148 N.C. App. 310, 559 S.E.2d 5 (2002), finding no error in the judgments entered 16 November 1995 by Greeson, J., in Superior Court, Rockingham County. Heard in the Supreme Court 15 October 2002.
Roy Cooper, Attorney General, by Daniel R O’Brien, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.
Lisa Miles for defendant-appellant.