Here’s a fact pattern that comes up from time to time: Dan walks into a store, takes some merchandise, and leaves without paying for it. Eric, a store employee, sees Dan stealing the merchandise. He follows Dan into the parking lot and confronts him. A scuffle ensues. What’s the proper charge?
Jeff Welty
News Roundup
This week, the General Assembly passed H774, which, if signed by the governor or allowed to become law without his signature, would make two significant changes in the administration of the death penalty. Specifically, it would allow a medical professional other than a physician to be present at an execution (current law requires a doctor), and would allow the state to withhold from the public information concerning the identity of any person or entity that supplies the drugs used in lethal injection. WRAL covers the controversy over the bill here. Generally, proponents contend that the changes are needed to allow executions to resume while opponents argue that the bill will simply engender more litigation.
The Early Impact of Rodriguez v. United States
About three months ago, the United States Supreme Court decided Rodriguez v. United States, __ U.S. __, 135 S. Ct. 1609 (2015). I wrote about it here. In a nutshell, the Court ruled that once the purpose of a traffic stop has been addressed – or reasonably should have been addressed – an officer can’t extend the stop, even briefly, for unrelated investigative activities such as drug dog sniffs, unless the officer has reasonable suspicion of criminal activity to support the continued detention.
The rule is clear enough in theory but it can give rise to some difficult questions in practice. May an officer engage in brief chit-chat with a motorist, or does such interaction constitute an extension of the stop? What about inquiring about a motorist’s travel plans, or a passenger’s, where such inquiries may bear on the likelihood of driver fatigue but also may be used to seek out inconsistencies that may be evidence of illicit activity? May an officer comply with Rodriguez by multi-tasking, i.e., by asking unrelated questions while examining a driver’s license, or does multi-tasking inherently slow an officer down and so extend a stop?
Courts across the country are beginning to address some of these questions. This post summarizes the early impact of Rodriguez.
News Roundup
I was captivated this week by the escape of drug billionaire Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman from a maximum-security prison in Mexico. He walked out through a mile-long tunnel that led from his shower to a building beyond prison walls. You can see the inside of the tunnel here. The DEA is saying all the right things but must be just a little miffed about the whole thing, since (1) this is Guzman’s second escape from a Mexican prison, and (2) Mexico denied the United States’ request to extradite Guzman to face charges in the United States, claiming that it was able to ensure his continued confinement.
By coincidence, I recently finished The Cartel, a novel by Don Winslow about Mexico’s war on drugs. It starts with a Sinaloan kingpin’s escape from a maximum security prison in Mexico, so it’s timely and topical. It’s also bloody and riveting.
Limits on Defendants’ Courtroom Attire
Shea and I have blogged before about and lawyer attire and juror attire. I’ve even touched briefly on defendants’ attire, but none of us have ever addressed a judge’s ability to set minimum clothing standards for defendants. That issue has reared its head in Fayetteville, where a district court judge recently held a defendant in contempt for wearing several large voodoo necklaces. The local news story, with a picture, is here, and a transcript of a recording of the incident is here.
Revisiting State v. Jackson, the Pedestrian Evasion Case
Last summer, I wrote about State v. Jackson, __ N.C. App. __, 758 S.E.2d 39 (2014), in which the court of appeals ruled that an officer lacked reasonable suspicion to stop a pedestrian who engaged in what the officer viewed as suspicious and evasive behavior. Last month, the state supreme court reversed the court of appeals. The opinion is here; my summary and analysis of it is below.
News Roundup
This week’s roundup is packed full of good stuff, including news about a new member of the court of appeals, information about North Carolina’s leading role in a major law review piece, data on prosecutor diversity, an announcement of a new publication, and more. Check it out!
What’s In a (Trade) Name?
Today, the court of appeals reversed a defendant’s drug convictions because the indictments identified the controlled substances in question using terms that are widely used to describe the drugs, but that are neither the chemical names listed in the controlled substance schedules nor – according to the court – “trade names” for the drugs. Because more and more drug cases involve pharmaceuticals that have many names, it is worth reviewing the case.
News Roundup
The highly publicized escape of two murderers from a New York prison came to an end this week as Richard Matt was shot and killed and David Sweat was shot and captured. Sweat has been telling investigators about the escape and has apparently revealed quite a few interesting details. CNN has the latest here. For whatever reason, even our local media paid much less attention to the escape of a murderer from a North Carolina prison last weekend. Like the incident in New York, North Carolina’s escape involved romance between an inmate and a female guard, as WNCN reports here. The escapee has been recaptured.
The North Carolina Criminal Self-Dealing Statute: Five Things You Should Know
My colleague Frayda Bluestein recently wrote a post with the above title on the School of Government’s local government blog. Her post begins as follows: In North Carolina, it is a crime for certain public officials and employees to contract with the units of government they work for or represent. G.S. 14-234 makes it a misdemeanor … Read more