blank

Immigration Consequences of DV Offenses: Stalking and Violation of DVPOs

Last week, in the first part of this two-part series, I talked about the “crime of domestic violence” ground of deportability for noncitizens and what role convictions of North Carolina offenses play in triggering that ground. This post covers immigration consequences of the “stalking” and “violation of protection orders” grounds of deportability.

Read more

blank

News Roundup

Raleigh is ending its red-light camera program after two decades of operation. The News and Observer has the story here. Red-light camera programs across North Carolina have steadily folded following court rulings that their funding model (in which the camera vendor is paid more than 10 percent of the net proceeds of fines) runs afoul of the fines and forfeiture clause of the state constitution.

Of course, the city still wants people to stop at red lights. Last year, it installed reflective backplates, a border on traffic signals to make them stand out, at red-light-camera-intersection signals.

Keep reading for more local, national, and international criminal and court-related news.

Read more

blank

Immigration Consequences of DV Offenses: Crimes of Domestic Violence

A noncitizen can lose status—that is, the right to be in the U.S.—and be forced to leave if he or she comes within a ground of deportability. In general, the grounds of deportability apply to noncitizens who have been lawfully “admitted.” This includes both lawful permanent residents (“green card” holders) and holders of temporary, nonimmigrant visas.

There are several criminal grounds of deportability in the federal immigration statutes, provided in Title 8, Section 1227 of the United States Code. One of these grounds is conviction of a crime of domestic violence. In order to be a crime of domestic violence under federal immigration law, the offense must meet the federal definition of a “crime of violence” under 18 U.S.C. 16 and must also be against a person in a domestic relationship with the defendant. This provision of the statute also includes deportation for crimes of child abuse, child neglect, or child abandonment, but discussion of those grounds is outside the scope of this post.

This post is the first in a two-part series and examines immigration consequences of convictions of offenses involving domestic violence under North Carolina law. It is not intended to be a comprehensive analysis of immigration law; rather, it assesses the immigration consequences of selected North Carolina offenses and only within the scope of the domestic violence ground of deportability.

Read more

News Roundup

A bill to “recriminalize” the possession of certain dangerous drugs is moving forward in Oregon. Oregon became the first state to decriminalize the possession of drugs such as cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin, and fentanyl when voters approved of a 2020 ballot initiative, with 58% in favor. If Governor Tina Kotek signs the new legislation (she states she will), possession of these drugs will again be classified as a misdemeanor. The new law would provide for a range of responses, including treatment alternatives to incarceration, diversionary options such as conditional discharges, and up to 180 days in jail. Proponents argue that the surge in fentanyl overdoses requires that penalties be reinstated, while others argue that decriminalization was not the cause of increased fentanyl use.

Read on for more criminal law news.

Read more

blank

Congratulations to Newly Certified Magistrates

Magistrates are often referred to as the “first face” of the judicial system for most citizens. They serve the public with professionalism, all while keeping abreast of the rapidly changing civil and criminal laws. In 2021, their training requirements were increased by the legislature from 12 hours every two years to 12 hours every year. … Read more

News Roundup

Bankman-Fried sentencing. Regular readers know that I’m interested in the criminal case against Sam Bankman-Fried, founder of the fallen cryptocurrency exchange FTX. I even read a book about Bankman-Fried, which I reviewed here. He has been convicted in federal court and his sentencing hearing is set for March 28. The United States Probation Office has calculated his Guideline sentence as 110 years in prison, and has recommended a downward variance to 100 years. (They temper justice with mercy at the United States Probation Office.) Bankman-Fried’s attorneys have responded with a 90-page sentencing memorandum, arguing that Bankman-Fried is a selfless philanthropist at heart; that there are no victims of his crimes because it now appears that there were sufficient assets in FTX to pay all customers and creditors; and that a proper application of the Guidelines calls for a sentence of approximately 6 years but that given various mitigating circumstances, “a sentence that returns [Bankman-Fried] promptly to a productive role in society would . . . comply with the purposes of sentencing.” Stay tuned for further developments! And keep reading for more news.

Read more

New Projects in Policing & Responding: Evaluating the Impact of Alternative Responses to Crisis Calls

In partnership with the North Carolina Association of Chiefs of Police and local stakeholders, the UNC School of Government Criminal Justice Innovation Lab (the Lab) is conducting two evaluations of North Carolina alternative responder programs over the next two years. These programs reduce or remove law enforcement’s role in responding to certain crisis calls—such as those involving behavioral health issues or homelessness—and connect people to services to address root causes of behavior. The first project is an evaluation of an existing program in the City of Burlington. The second is an evaluation of a pilot program in Orange County.

Read more

blank

Addressing Substance Use Disorders Through Delinquency Dispositions

The Juvenile Code authorizes 14 different dispositional alternatives for delinquency cases that result in Level 1 dispositions and 23 different dispositional alternatives for delinquency cases that result in Level 2 dispositions. G.S. 7B-2508(c), (d); G.S. 7B-2506(1)-(23). For both Level I and Level 2 dispositions, cooperating with substance abuse treatment is a dispositional option.  It can be challenging to sort through the many available dispositional alternatives to order an effective and individually tailored disposition that addresses the risks and needs of the juvenile. This blog addresses why it might be important to focus on substance use disorders as part of disposition, how to know when a juvenile needs substance use disorder treatment, and how substance use disorder treatment may be included as a dispositional alternative.

Read more

When (and If) an Order for Arrest Should Issue after Dismissal to the Grand Jury

It is no secret that probable cause hearings are rare throughout North Carolina, despite clear provisions for conducting them in the general statutes. See G.S. 15A-606, 611-614. The reasons for their rarity have been set forth on this blog as far back as 2009. Prosecutors often point to the volume of felony cases moving through district court and the impracticality of conducting a mini-trial with “all the trappings of a full adversary hearing” in explaining why they routinely bypass the procedure. See State v. Lester, 294 N.C. 220, 224 (1978). However, skipping the PC hearing can create a gap, or bump, in the “regular” course of a criminal case, leading to various issues.

At the probable cause stage in district court, the defendant may waive the hearing, assert the right to a hearing and get one, or assert the right to a hearing and not get one. In this last scenario, the State, rather than engaging in the hearing, may choose to dismiss the case in district court and then recharge the matter in superior court by seeking an indictment. This practice is referred to as “voluntary dismissal to the grand jury” (VDGJ) or “dismissal for possible indictment.” The State’s bypassing of the probable cause hearing has never been deemed reversible error in North Carolina, as the defendant must demonstrate prejudice, which is rarely possible. See State v. Wiggins, 344 N.C. 18 (1993).

After voluntary dismissal to the grand jury, a crucial question arises as to whether an order for arrest (OFA) should issue upon indictment. The question is the subject of this blog post.

Read more