A case is dismissed if a judge finds in a proceeding that the evidence or facts presented by the plaintiff do not stand up to the case and that those facts do not prove anything against the defendant. Insufficient evidence may even be grounds for appeal. The motion for dismissal referred to in G.S. 15A-1227 is essentially the same as the motion described in G.S. 15-173 (“Demurrer to the evidence”, so that the defendant “may dismiss the claim or render judgment as in the case of a non-claim” after the state has substantiated its evidence). There is little to no practical difference between the two. See statement v. Mendez, 42 N.C. App. 141 (1979); see also G.S. 15A-1414 (Application for dismissal after judgment or setting aside of judgment).
Whether it is a request for dismissal, a request for non-action or a request for judgment, the legal effect is essentially the same. See State v. Bruce, 315 N.C. 273 (1985); State v. Mize, 315 N.C. 285 (1985); State v. Vietto, 297 N.C. 8 (1979). According to G.S. 15A-1227, the accused may file an application to close the proceedings if there is insufficient evidence for a conviction. Such a request may be made: (i) at the end of the State`s taking of evidence; (ii) at the end of any evidence; (iii) after a finding of guilt has been rendered and before the court renders a verdict; or (iv) after the jury has been released without trial and before the end of the trial.
G.S. 15A-1227(a). The failure to file a motion to dismiss at the end of the State`s taking of evidence or at the end of all evidence does not preclude the defence from filing a motion on one of the other two subsequent dates. The judge “must rule on a motion to dismiss for insufficient evidence before the trial can take place”. G.S. 15A-1227(c). Show that the prosecution witness may not have seen, heard, smelled or felt the evidence reported because of the circumstances surrounding it. In other words, insufficient evidence means that the prosecutor who bears the burden of proof of the veracity of a criminal charge does not have sufficient evidence of the defendant`s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. A certain type of motion to be dismissed on the basis of insufficient evidence is based on the principle of “corpus delicti” or “of the whole crime”. See State v.
Smith, 362 N.C. 583 (2008). According to the corpus delicti rule, the State cannot rely solely on the extrajudicial confession of the accused to obtain a conviction; Instead, the state must provide substantial independent evidence to confirm and substantiate the facts underlying the confession. See State v. Wynn, 276 N.C. App. 411 (2021); State v. Trexler, 316 N.C.
528 (1986); State v. Parker, 315 N.C. 222 (1985). On this page, you will find the legal definition and meaning of Insufficient Evidence, written in plain English, as well as examples of how it is used. In the case of a defence motion to dismiss the case for insufficient evidence, the question to be decided by the judge is whether there is “substantial evidence” concerning: (i) a substantial element of the offence (or a less serious offence); and (ii) the identity of the accused as the perpetrator of the offence. See State v. Hill, 365 N.C. 273 (2011); State v. Scott, 356 N.C. 591 (2002). “Substantial evidence” has been defined as “any relevant evidence that a reasonable mind could accept as sufficient to support a conclusion.” State v. Smith, 300 N.C.
71 (1980). As long as there is solid evidence on both issues, the request for dismissal should be dismissed; Where the evidence gives rise only to a suspicion or presumption in respect of one or both elements, the request should be granted. Id.; State v. Fleming, 350 N.C. 109 (1999). The evidence must be considered in the light most favourable to the state and gives it the advantage of all reasonable conclusions. Hill, 365 N.C. at 275; Scott, 356 N.C.
at 596; Fleming, 350 N.C. at 142. It also means that the motion reads as follows: Indicting or discrediting the district attorney`s alleged evidence comes in several ways. Here are some common ways defense attorneys indict the district attorney`s evidence, trying to break down the sufficiency of the district attorney`s evidence he or she needs to prove his or her case beyond a doubt. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt: Proof beyond a reasonable doubt means that the district attorney has presented evidence to a jury until the jury has a permanent belief that the criminal charge is true. This legal definition is sometimes confusing. Essentially, unequivocal evidence means that the district attorney has presented sufficient evidence to such an extent that the jury believes the charge is true, and if the jury has doubts about the guilt of the accused, that doubt is subjectively inappropriate for that juror. The defence of insufficient evidence is perhaps the most frequently used defence in a criminal case. Insufficient evidence is a negative defense, which means that the accused tacitly claims (silence) or through witness testimony that he did not commit the alleged crime or that the prosecutor cannot prove that he committed the alleged crime.
Note: Every element of a criminal allegation must be proven beyond doubt. For example, if a prosecutor attempts to prove the crime of theft, he or she must prove: (1) that the defendant took an object, (2) from another person, (3) with force or fear, (4) without consent or legal justification, and (5) without intent to return to the object. If the prosecutor proves only four of the five elements without doubt, the defendant is entitled to an acquittal. Demonstrate that police or laboratory technicians did not use appropriate protocols when collecting, storing, or analyzing evidence, which may lead to unreliable or even illegal evidence, or that laboratory technicians did not have proper certification. Note: Evidence seized by law enforcement agencies that results from an unlawful search or seizure is generally not admissible evidence against the defendant whose rights have been violated. Promotion of insufficient evidence: the accused has the right to remain silent and rely on the burden of the prosecutor to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any element of the criminal charge; As a rule, however, defense lawyers promote insufficient evidence by indicting (discrediting) the prosecutor`s evidence or by presenting alternative evidence that exonerates the accused (showing the absence of guilt).