blank

Riley and Retroactivity

Last month the U.S. Supreme Court held that under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, officers can’t search a cell phone as a search incident to arrest. Riley v. California, __ U.S. __, 134 S.Ct. 2473 (2014). For background on those cases, see the blog post here. Since then I’ve had a bunch of … Read more

Wiretapping Data — And a Question

In connection with an ongoing research project, I recently reviewed the 2013 Wiretap Report, prepared by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. It contains some information that may be of interest to readers, including: 3,576 wiretaps were authorized by federal or state courts in 2013, about twice the number authorized a decade earlier. … Read more

blank

State v. Granger Adds to State’s Missouri v. McNeely Jurisprudence

State v. Granger, decided last week, is the latest case in which the North Carolina Court of Appeals has considered, in light of Missouri v. McNeely, __ U.S. __, 133 S.Ct. 1552 (2013), whether an exigency supported the warrantless withdrawal of an impaired driving suspect’s blood over the person’s objection. Readers may recall that the … Read more

Limits on the Use of Statements of Charges in Superior Court

This week, the court of appeals decided a case that is a good reminder about the limits of the State’s authority to address problems in charging documents by filing a misdemeanor statement of charges. In State v. Wall, Richmond County officers sought to arrest William Wall, Sr. based on a Florida warrant and to serve … Read more

Is There a Tolling Donut Hole?

I wrote previously (here and here) about the “donut hole” in the probation law regarding absconding. In short, due to a wrinkle in legislative effective dates, persons on probation for an offense committed before December 1, 2011 who abscond after that date cannot be revoked for absconding. Today’s post considers whether a similar phenomenon arises … Read more

blank

Drugged Driving and Jury Instructions

To prove that a person drove a vehicle while under the influence of an impairing substance in violation of G.S. 20-138.1(a)(3), the State must establish that the defendant was impaired by [a]lcohol , a controlled substance under Chapter 90 of the General Statutes, some other drug or psychoactive substance capable of impairing a person’s physical … Read more

The Supreme Court Investigates Apparently Unauthorized Cert. Petition in Capital Case

Monday, the Supreme Court denied a petition for certiorari filed in Ballard v. Pennsylvania. One interesting aspect of the case is that the defendant on whose behalf the petition was filed says that he never authorized it to be filed, and the lawyer who filed it says that he is not the inmate’s lawyer. The … Read more

blank

Bail Bondsmen Are Not Above the Law

Post bail and skip out on court in North Carolina and chances are that someone other than a law enforcement officer will come looking for you. Bail bondsmen in this state have expansive powers to recapture their principals. Bondsmen may use reasonable force to apprehend a principal—even before a bond is forfeited. See State v. Mathis, … Read more