STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. MARQUISE SANTONIO BEAM (2025)

Marquise Santonio Beam (“Defendant”) appeals from judgments entered upon jury verdicts convicting him of numerous felonies arising out of an incident where he fired a weapon at an individual.

On appeal, Defendant argues the trial court committed plain error by instructing the jury on the theory of transferred intent. Indeed, the indictment charged that Defendant “willfully and feloniously did assault [the injured victim] with a ․ deadly weapon, with the intent to kill and inflicting serious bodily injury.” At trial, however, evidence showed that Defendant intended to shoot someone else, the State argued that Defendant was guilty of the crime for which he was indicted even though his intent was to shoot someone other than the injured victim, and the State instructed the jury that it could convict Defendant if he intended to kill someone other than the injured victim.

Our appellate courts have held that the doctrine of transferred intent may be given to support a specific intent crime where the defendant intended to harm another person and not the actual victim. See, e.g., State v. Locklear, 331 N.C. 239, 245 (1992); State v. Andrews, 154 N.C. App. 553, 558–59 (2002); State v. Mebane, No. COA10-447, 2011 N.C. App. LEXIS 464, at *14–15 (N.C. Ct. App. Mar. 15, 2011) (unpublished). Based on the reasoning of these decisions, we conclude Defendant has failed to meet his high burden of showing plain error. See State v. Reber, 386 N.C. 153 (2024).

NO ERROR.

Report per Rule 30(e).

PER CURIAM.