she had sex with C.T., and she responded: “No.” Later during the hearing, defense counsel represented to the trial court that C.T. was available to testify that he had sex with Helen earlier during the same week that she accused defendant. Defense counsel, however, failed to call C.T. to testify at the in camera hearing during the State’s case and did not attempt to call him as a witness during the defense’s case, at which point defendant could have renewed his contention regarding the relevance of C.T.’s testimony. Thus, as in Black, the only evidence presented regarding the alleged sexual activity with C.T. was Helen’s denial. Under Black, therefore, the trial court properly excluded C.T.’s testimony at trial. See also State v. Hammett, 182 N.C. App. 316, 319, 642 S.E.2d 454, 457 (<HOLDING>), appeal dismissed and disc. review denied, 361
holding that the denial of counsel to a father at a shelter hearing constituted a denial of due process renewable by certiorari holding the rule was not applicable in a pretrial venue hearing holding that an appellate court considers the entire record on appeal not just the evidence presented at the suppression hearing in affirming the denial of a motion to suppress holding black controlled as complainants denial was only evidence offered at in camera rule 412 hearing holding that appeal from denial of rule 60b motion raised for review only the district courts order of denial and not the underlying judgment itself