Some FAQ about Probation Violation Appeals
Jamie Markham
Today’s post gives my best answers to a few frequently asked questions about appeals of probation violation hearings.
June 9, 2016
Today’s post gives my best answers to a few frequently asked questions about appeals of probation violation hearings.
Read post "Some FAQ about Probation Violation Appeals"June 1, 2016
There aren’t very many federal cases about North Carolina probation. When we get one, I’m inclined to write about it. In Jones v. Chandrasuwan, __ F.3d __ (4th Cir. 2016), the Fourth Circuit announced a new rule about the level of suspicion required to arrest a probationer for a suspected probation violation.
Read post "What Level of Suspicion Is Required to Arrest for a Probation Violation?"May 26, 2016
The district attorney decides when to defer prosecution. But if that deferral includes probation under G.S. 15A-1341(a1), the court has a role in the process—including what to do in response to a violation of the deferred prosecution agreement. Sometimes the State and the judge are on the same page. Sometimes they aren’t.
Read post "Deferred Prosecution: Who Steers the Ship?"May 19, 2016
I have started to get questions about G.S. 15A-1380.5, a repealed statute that used to provide for judicial review of sentences to life without parole after 25 years of imprisonment. It’s too early for a court to be applying the law just yet—the first reviews shouldn’t happen until 2019—but we’re getting close, and people are talking about it. Today’s post describes the law.
Read post "Twenty-Five Year Review of Sentences to Life Without Parole"May 12, 2016
In 2008 the General Assembly created the new crimes of rape and sexual offense with a child by an adult offender (G.S. 14-27.2A and -27.4A, respectively). S.L. 2008-117. They have special sentencing rules, described here, including the possibility of a higher maximum sentence if the judge finds “egregious aggravation” in the case. Discussing the law immediately after it passed in 2008, John Rubin wrote (here, on page 3) that placing the responsibility for determining egregious aggravation on the judge—not the jury—was “likely unconstitutional” under Blakely v. Washington. As my kids like to say, “Nailed it.” State v. Singletary, decided by the court of appeals last week (and mentioned briefly in last week’s News Roundup), ratified John’s view.
Read post "Egregious Aggravation Is Unconstitutional"May 2, 2016
The North Carolina Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission and the Division of Adult Correction recently released their Correctional Program Evaluation: Offenders Placed on Probation or Released from Prison in FY 2013—known better as the recidivism report. Every biennial report is interesting—who wouldn’t want to know how present sentencing choices affect future crime?—but this report is especially interesting because it is the first one to include a sizable number of defendants sentenced and supervised after Justice Reinvestment. We can begin to see if the law is working as intended.
Read post "Sentencing Commission Recidivism Report Available"April 21, 2016
Sentencing nerds rejoice. The North Carolina Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission released its annual statistical report last week. The report is available here.
Read post "2016 Sentencing Commission Statistical Report Available"April 14, 2016
When can money owed as the result of criminal case be docketed as a civil judgment?
Read post "Civil Judgments for Criminal Monetary Obligations"March 31, 2016
Probation that includes incarceration is “special probation.” But it’s still probation.
Read post "The Split Is Part of the Probation"March 29, 2016
Much has been written—and much of it by the Supreme Court—on the proper way to find aggravating factors for sentencing. After Apprendi v. New Jersey, Blakely v. Washington, and countless cases at the state level, it is of course clear that a defendant has a Sixth Amendment right to have aggravating factors proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. Once sentencing factors are properly found, however, responsibility shifts back to the judge to decide what to do about them. The rules for weighing factors are as loosey-goosey as the rules for finding them are rigid.
Read post "Weighing Aggravating and Mitigating Factors"