Repository Collection 03

State v. Philip Davis

SUPPLEMENTAL CASE ENTRY

Last Revised • July 7, 2026

This Source Verification Page documents the criminal case of State v. Philip Davis as referenced in Statement of Facts D of the Supplemental Motion. Because the underlying court filings were not available for independent public review, this page relies upon contemporaneous reporting by the Asheville Citizen-Times to verify the disposition of the case and provide additional context regarding the destruction of jury selection notes and the agreement to grant a new sentencing hearing.


Related SMAR Citation

“[State v. Davis, Buncombe County Superior Court No. CRS 57616-16]”
“[See State v. Phillip Davis, Joint Brief of the Parties, at 13].”


Source Name

State v. Philip Davis


Citation

Buncombe County Superior Court No. 97 CRS 57616-16


Publication

Asheville Citizen-Times


Publication Date

November 3, 2016


Verification Source

Asheville Citizen Times (Tonya Maxwell)


Source Location

Asheville Citizen-Times


Highlighted Pages

1–3, 6 (Page 3 – Top Gun II reference)


Referenced in the Supplemental Motion

Page 29, Paragraph: 51


Verification Notes

The Joint Brief of the Parties in State v. Philip Davis was not publicly accessible at the time this Source Verification Page was prepared. Verification of the case and related proceedings relies upon contemporaneous reporting and publicly available court information. Should the original court filings become available, they will be added to this page.


Cited to Support

May's allegation that prosecutorial misconduct within the Buncombe County District Attorney's Office extended beyond his own case and affected other capital prosecutions. May cites State v. Davis to support his claim that evidence relevant to post-conviction review was intentionally destroyed by the District Attorney's Office. Specifically, May relies upon findings and representations made in the Davis proceedings that jury selection notes and juror questionnaires were purposefully destroyed, thereby impairing the defendant's ability to litigate claims arising from his capital sentencing proceedings.


Supporting Documents

Original Article

Link to the original article.

View Website →


Highlighted Research Copy

Working research copy containing the highlighted passages cited in the Supplemental Motion.

View PDF →


Continue Your Research

Return to Statement of Facts D

Continue browsing the sources cited throughout Statement of Facts D.

Browse Sources →

Return to Source Verification Archive

Return to the main Source Verification Archive and explore additional sections of the Supplemental Motion.

Browse Archive →