Overcrowding at North Carolina jails continues to be a problem, with Wake County jails holding more than 1,800 people in August despite a capacity of 1,574. As noted in prior news roundups, sheriffs point to the passage of Iryna’s Law as a cause of the increased population. Wake County Sheriff Willie Rowe says he has spoken with law enforcement agencies to consider citation rather than arrest for those charged with non-violent offenses to alleviate crowding concerns. Incarcerated individuals say that conditions in the jail are poor with unsanitary living quarters and people sleeping on the floor. Renovation plans are in place to add 240 beds by the beginning of next year and to eventually increase capacity to 2,400.
Investigation into DV prevention program. In 2020, the North Carolina legislature allocated $3.5 million to fund a domestic violence prevention program that relied on electronic monitoring technology to help enforce stay-away orders. Judicial officials say the program is highly effective and have called it a “lifeline for victims.”
However, the program came to the attention of federal investigators after concerns arose that the legislation limited the number of companies that could compete to provide the equipment and did not incorporate the usual bid process. The company that ultimately received the contract had ties to the House Speaker and to an individual who helped write the legislation. It is unclear whether the federal investigation is ongoing. However, Wake County District Attorney Lorrin Freeman recently stated that she asked the State Bureau of Investigation to open a probe into the funding of the program last November, and the SBI has confirmed the investigation is active.
Traffic stop data-gathering terminated. Since January 1, 2000, North Carolina law has required state law enforcement officers to collect the age and race of people stopped in traffic stops. However, it recently came to light that the legislature repealed the law on July 1 as part of the budget bill. Researchers and advocates assert that the data-gathering is an important tool that allows them to uncover patterns of bias in policing. However, various law enforcement organizations have pushed to end the practice, contending that the requirement was burdensome and yielded inconsistent and unreliable results.
Lawmakers have spoken out to criticize the process behind the change in law. It appears that many legislators were unaware of the provision, as it consisted of two lines in a 634-page budget bill.
Some law enforcement agencies could voluntarily choose to continue to gather the demographic data.
Interstate extradition and interstate litigation. In a news roundup last month, I wrote about how prosecutors in Minneapolis received evidence from federal authorities pertaining to shootings by ICE agents after agreeing to share evidence pertaining to another shooting incident with the feds. That other shooting incident involved ICE agent Christian Castro. Castro had been charged by Minnesota prosecutors in May with charges relating to shooting through a door of a home and hitting a man in the leg, as well as fabricating a story about the man attacking an officer with a broom handle and snow shovel.
Castro was arrested in Texas on the Minnesota charges in late May. He subsequently declined to be voluntarily transferred to Minnesota, and Minnesota officials sought extradition. However, Texas Governor Greg Abbott did not act on the request by issuing a Governor’s Warrant. The Minnesota officials filed a lawsuit in federal court to force the governor to act, but Texas attorneys responded that Governor Abbott was waiting to determine whether Castro was a “fugitive” under the Extradition Clause. The judge ruled with Texas, finding a lack of subject matter jurisdiction as the controversy was not ripe. Castro was released from a Texas jail yesterday after no Governor’s Warrant was issued and the 90-day limit on detention expired.
Religious testimony in murder trial. Last week, Jeff wrote about the Durham case in which a woman is charged with the murder of one her children and the attempted murder of another. The defense has invoked similarities with Lindsay Clancy, who is currently being tried for the murder of her children in Massachusetts. Both cases involve claims of postpartum psychosis as part of an insanity defense.
As an evidence professor, I was interested to read about rulings last week in the Clancy case regarding the propriety of testimony relating to religion. An expert witness for the prosecution who had evaluated Clancy testified that he had asked her whether suicide was a mortal sin. The defense objected and asked for a mistrial. The defense argued that the state was intentionally injecting the Roman Catholic faith into the trial and pointed to a previous incident in which the prosecution referenced religion. In response, the prosecutor stressed that she had not deliberately elicited any religious opinions from the witness, while also asserting that the witness had delved into the area as part of an appropriate inquiry in insanity cases into whether the defendant appreciated the wrongfulness of her conduct, legal or moral. After hearing these arguments, available on Court TV, the judge forcefully instructed the jury not to consider the testimony and declared it “absolutely inappropriate.” The interchange called to mind some nuanced distinctions Jamie previously raised in a blog post on religious comments at sentencing.
On the broader questions around mental illness and culpability, this NY Times article discusses various views as to how postpartum psychosis should be treated by the legal system. The article also sets out trends regarding the prevalence of the insanity defense and other mental health defenses nationwide and around the world.
Officer hails an Uber. An Uber driver in Houston had little time to react when an officer jumped in his car and yelled, “Hey, give me a ride over there, please… go… drive that way… go, go, go, go!” The officer had been running after a suspect accused of threatening to shoot a woman and her children when the officer apparently saw the Uber and saw an opportunity to catch up. The driver subsequently picked up the officer’s partner and drove around looking for the suspect for about three minutes. After failing to find him, the driver dropped the officers back at the apartment where their patrol vehicles were parked. Some commentators (and the driver’s wife) questioned the propriety of “commandeering” the Uber, noting the risk posed to the driver. The driver, for his part, said he would “definitely do it again.”
Have a great weekend and we will see you on Monday.
