Last week I got drawn into a discussion about a North Carolina local government official convicted of DWI. The question was whether he was getting “special treatment” when his 60-day sentences were cut in half to 30 days. As most readers of this blog know, there’s nothing special about that: most active DWI sentences (except for aggravated level one) are effectively cut in half by Good Time, pursuant to N.C. Department of Public Safety administrative policy. Today’s post considers a related wrinkle: when a DWI defendant has jail credit, should that credit be applied before or after the sentence is “cut in half”?
Jamie Markham
Mail Regulation in the Jail
Handling mail to and from inmates is a challenge for jail administrators. Of course they want to enable inmates to handle their legitimate business (including pending legal matters) and maintain family and community ties. On the other hand, they must be on guard against contraband or inappropriate materials coming into the jail, or inmates participating in crimes or planning an escape from within. Inmates have a constitutional right to communicate with others and to access the courts, but those rights are limited by the jail’s obligation to preserve security, good order, and discipline. This post collects some of the basic legal principles that should be incorporated into the jail’s policy on mail regulation. By state administrative regulation, every jail must have a written policy on handling inmate mail.
New Sentencing Handbook Available
The 2015-2016 edition of the North Carolina Sentencing Handbook with Felony, Misdemeanor, and DWI Sentencing Grids is available from the School of Government. Like previous editions, it contains instructions on felony sentencing, misdemeanor sentencing, and DWI sentencing; the sentencing grids themselves; and various appendices that may be helpful in your work.
The 300-Foot Rule Goes to Church
Last week the court of appeals decided another case involving the sex offender premises restriction in G.S. 14-208.18. The defendant was convicted of being within 300 feet of a church preschool.
Habitualized Sex Crimes
Suppose a defendant is convicted of a Class F–I felony that requires registration as a sex offender. He is also convicted as a habitual felon. When sentencing the defendant as a habitual felon, the court obviously will select a minimum sentence appropriate for an offense that is four classes higher than the underlying felony. But what maximum sentence should the court impose? Should it use the regular maximum sentence from G.S. 15A-1340.17(e), or the elevated sex offender maximum from subsection (f)?
Three-Year Review of Probation
When a probationer has served three years of a probationary period greater than three years, the probation officer is required to bring the case before the court for a mandatory review. The review has one statutory purpose: to give the court an opportunity to terminate probation early.
The Courts’ Limited Role in Post-Release Supervision
Before 2011, post-release supervision (PRS) was a bit of a novelty. Back then, only Class B1–E felons received PRS, and they account for only 15 percent of all felons. For offenses committed on and after December 1, 2011, the Justice Reinvestment Act amended the law to require post-release supervision for all felons who serve active time, regardless of offense class. As a result, there are now close to 10,000 post-release supervisees in North Carolina. More offenders means more questions. And one of the most common questions is what role, if any, the courts have in the administration of post-release supervision. The answer: very little.
Consecutive Splits
I am asked from time to time whether imprisonment terms for special probation (split sentences) may be run consecutively. I think they probably may.
Consolidation of Sentences
North Carolina sentencing law allows multiple convictions to be consolidated for sentencing. Consolidation of felonies is governed by G.S. 15A-1340.15(b); G.S. 15A-1340.22(b) covers misdemeanors. The rule is the same for both types of crimes: when you consolidate offenses for judgment, the court imposes a single judgment, with a single sentence appropriate for the defendant’s most serious conviction. It’s a pretty extraordinary thing when you think about it. Notwithstanding all the fine-tuned, mandatory math that goes into the sentencing of a single offense under Structured Sentencing, the law allows virtually unfettered discretion to disregard all but the most serious offense for a defendant convicted of multiple crimes. Today’s post collects some of the rules for consolidation.