State v. Mebane

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant’s convictions, concluding that the trial judge’s questioning of witnesses did not rise to a due process violation, the evidence supported an inference of intent to kill, and the unpreserved instructional claims were waived and did not satisfy plain-error review. The court also held that the instructions, considered as a whole, did not mislead the jury. Justice D’AURIA, dissenting in part, would have ordered a new trial because the judge’s questioning of the defense experts could have appeared to endorse the state’s theory and discredit the defense.