One of the top stories this week was the announcement by the Department of Justice that they intend to recommend a one-day, time-served sentence for former Louisville, Kentucky police officer, Brett Hankison. Hankinson was tried and convicted in federal court for using excessive force in violation of Breonna Taylor’s civil rights. Taylor was killed by police officers after they executed a no-knock search warrant around midnight on March 13, 2020. Taylor’s romantic partner mistook the officers for intruders and fired a shot, wounding one of the officers. Officers then collectively fired 22 shots, resulting in Taylor’s death. Although no shots fired by Hankinson hit Taylor, he fired ten times through a glass door and a window, and three of the shots entered an adjacent apartment occupied by another family. Hankinson’s conviction carries a maximum sentence of life, and his presentence report recommends a sentence of between 11- and 14-years imprisonment. The Justice Department contends that the felony conviction, lost firearms rights, and lost ability to work as a law enforcement officer is punishment enough, given that Hankinson did not injure anyone and was returning fire. Read on for more criminal law news.
State v. Tate: DNA Analysis, the Confrontation Clause, and Testimonial Hearsay
My colleague Joe Hyde blogged last week about the Court of Appeals’ determination in State v. Tate, __ N.C. App. ___ (June 18, 2025), that the trial court did not err when it instructed the jury on a theory that was not alleged in the indictment. I’m returning to Tate this week to discuss another aspect of the Court’s holding, namely its determination that the defendant’s confrontation clause rights were not violated when an expert from the State Crime Lab testified to an opinion that was based in part on DNA test results generated by private third-party laboratory. This post will unpack the court’s analysis of that issue and will consider what it might mean for testimony by substitute analysts more generally.
May a Sheriff or a Deputy Enforce a Municipal Ordinance?
Municipal police have many duties, sometimes including enforcing municipal ordinances. Municipalities without their own police departments typically rely on the county sheriff to provide law enforcement services. The sheriff certainly has territorial jurisdiction to enforce state laws within city limits. But may the sheriff and his or her deputies also enforce municipal ordinances?
News Roundup
Floods have gripped the nation. From Texas, to New Mexico, to here in central North Carolina, severe floods have taken lives and devastated communities. In Texas, floods have killed over 120 people statewide, with over 160 still missing. Due to substantial damage, recovery efforts have slowed, signaling a long road ahead for those with missing loved ones. In New Mexico, flash flooding on Tuesday killed three people and severely damaged the mountain community of Ruidoso—which just spent a year recovering from devastating wildfires and flooding in 2024. Locally, tropical storm Chantal brought heavy flooding across five counties on Sunday evening, taking six lives. Thunderstorms and flooding have continued through the week, striking Durham on Wednesday and multiple counties last night. For those affected, click here for shelter options, water notices, and other flood relief resources. Local businesses and charities are also leading the way in collecting and distributing donations. Read on for the latest in criminal law news.
Highlights from the 2024 Sentencing Commission Statistical Report
Today’s post reviews the latest Structured Sentencing Statistical Report from the North Carolina Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission.
New Report on the Use of Social Workers in NC Public Defender Offices
Last month, the School of Government’s Criminal Justice Innovation Lab released a new report evaluating the implementation of social work positions in North Carolina public defender offices. This report is the culmination of an eighteen-month partnership between the Lab and the Office of Indigent Defense Services (IDS) to learn more about the day-to-day function of social workers, explore the benefits and challenges of integrating social work staff, and develop recommendations for other offices interested to add or expand social work capacity. This post summarizes the findings from the implementation evaluation and the accompanying recommendations.
Variations on State v. Singleton: Surplus Theory in State v. Tate.
After State v. Singleton, 386 N.C. 183 (2024), an indictment is not rendered facially invalid by failure to allege all the elements of a crime. One issue that remains unresolved is the consequence of failure to allege the State’s theory. Two post-Singleton cases decided last year found reversible error when the trial court instructed the jury on a theory not alleged in the indictment. See State v. Wilson, 910 S.E.2d 407 (N.C. Ct. App. Dec. 31, 2024); State v. Little, 296 N.C. App. 424 (2024). More recently, in State v. Tate, No. COA24-450 (N.C. Ct. App. June 18, 2025), the Court of Appeals cited Singleton in support of its conclusion that the trial court did not err by instructing the jury on a theory that was not alleged in the indictment. This post examines the opinion in Tate.
Case Summaries: N.C. Court of Appeals (July 2, 2025)
This post summarizes the published criminal opinions from the North Carolina Court of Appeals released on July 2, 2025.
State v. Aspiote and Contempt Proceedings Against a Person Who Appears Impaired in Court
In State v. Aspiote, ___ N.C. App. ___ (May 21, 2025), the North Carolina Court of Appeals determined that the trial court erred in holding a defendant in direct criminal contempt for appearing in court to plead guilty with impairing substances in his system. This post will review the circumstances that led to the contempt finding in Aspiote and the Court of Appeals’ analysis of why the trial court erred and will consider a trial court’s authority to hold a person in contempt for appearing in court while impaired.