A UNC School of Government Blog
For the first time since 1995 we have a new felony punishment chart for Structured Sentencing. Two pieces of legislation from the past session, S.L. 2009-555 and S.L. 2009-556, made changes that will become effective December 1, 2009 and apply to offenses committed on or after that date. The first law restructures the point ranges … Read more
I first encountered North Carolina’s impaired driving sentencing scheme several years ago when I worked as an Assistant Federal Public Defender for the Eastern District of North Carolina. I represented defendants charged under the Assimilative Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C. § 13, with committing violations of assimilated state offenses on a certain federal enclave in Fayetteville. … Read more
Under G.S. 15A-1343(c1), defendants placed on supervised probation must pay a monthly supervision fee of $30, unless exempted by the court. That exemption may only be granted for good cause upon motion of the defendant. Over the past month or so I’ve received many calls from people who have heard that legislation from the past … Read more
The New York Times published this editorial last week advocating that all people convicted of impaired driving – including first-time offenders – be required to install ignition interlocks in their vehicles. The editorial was prompted by California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s signing of legislation imposing such a requirement for several California counties. Ignition interlock is a … Read more
Suppose a defendant is convicted of a crime and the judge wants to (or, in a “C” or “C/I” cell in the sentencing grid, has to) suspend the sentence. Can the defendant refuse probation and elect to serve the sentence? Unless the defendant’s crime was committed prior to January 1, 1997, the answer is no. … Read more
I’ll get to the topic of today’s post in just a moment, but first I wanted to note what I found to be a fascinating little tidbit about the Willingham case, which I’ve previously addressed here and here. It has to do with Willingham’s final words, and I promise that if you have the slightest … Read more
The First Amendment says, in part, that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . .” There are two religion clauses in the amendment, the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. Lately I’ve been getting a lot of questions about the Free Exercise … Read more
I mentioned earlier that the court of appeals decided two satellite-based monitoring cases this week. I discussed State v. Morrow on Wednesday. Today I’ll cover State v. Stines. In Stines, the defendant was convicted of taking indecent liberties with children in 1997 and again in 2004. He was sentenced to active time for the 2004 … Read more
It seems like every batch of new opinions from the court of appeals includes at least one case on satellite-based monitoring (SBM) of sex offenders. Yesterday’s batch had two. State v. Morrow involved a defendant convicted of indecent liberties with children in November of 2006. He was sentenced to probation, which was ultimately revoked in … Read more
Regular readers know the court of appeals has decided a lot of cases recently dealing with satellite-based monitoring (SBM) of sex offenders. Though many issues remain undecided, my sense is that some of the districts that were postponing SBM hearings to allow the appellate courts to weigh in on a few things are now moving … Read more