dissenting.
I dissent from the majority. I do not believe double jeopardy or collateral estoppel prevents the State from introducing evidence relevant to the crime with which defendant is charged. This is so even if the defendant has been acquitted of another crime which the evidence tends to prove.
I believe we are bound by State v. Baker, 34 N.C. App. 434, 238 S.E. 2d 648 (1977). That case considered and rejected the double jeopardy argument of defendant under similar circumstances and I believe it governs.
I vote to find no error in the trial.