What acts qualify as sexual acts? For North Carolina criminal law purposes, it depends on the context.
Uncategorized

Case Summaries — North Carolina Court of Appeals (August 4, 2020)
This post summarizes opinions issued by the Court of Appeals of North Carolina on August 4, 2020.

Meet Mary Pollard, the new Director of the Office of Indigent Defense Services
Yesterday, Mary Pollard began work as just the third Executive Director of the North Carolina Office of Indigent Defense Services (IDS), which began its work two decades ago in 2000. IDS is the statewide agency responsible for overseeing and enhancing legal representation for indigent defendants and others entitled to counsel under North Carolina law. Over the weekend, before she became deluged with her new responsibilities, Mary graciously agreed to do a quick interview with me. Read on to get to know a little more about her.

News Roundup
A fatal officer involved shooting in Roxboro last Friday has been in the news this week, setting off several days of demonstrations in the city and generating divided opinions about whether the use of deadly force was appropriate in the situation. As ABC 11 reports, Roxboro police officers responded to a 911 call reporting that a man, later identified as David Brooks Jr., was walking down the street carrying a gun. Dash camera footage shows that the officers encountered Brooks, who was carrying a shotgun, and ordered him to drop the weapon. Soon thereafter, an officer shot Brooks once in the chest, possibly after Brooks made a movement with the shotgun. The SBI now is investigating the incident. Keep reading for more on this story and other news.
New Legislation on Sex Offender Registration for Out-of-State Offenses
In a post last year, here, I discussed some of the issues related to sex offender registration for out-of-state offenses. Among other things, I noted a federal case in which a registrant challenged the constitutionality of North Carolina’s process (or, really, lack of process) for determining whether a conviction from another state is substantially similar to a North Carolina crime requiring registration. A subsequent case prompted a legislative change that is the main subject of today’s post.

No More Minors in Jails
Many people assumed that the implementation of raise the age on December 1, 2019 meant the end of confinement of anyone under 18 in a jail. That was not the case. Even under our new legal framework for juvenile jurisdiction, some youth under 18 still have cases that are handled in criminal court from the very beginning. There is currently no legal mechanism to house these youth in a juvenile detention facility instead of a jail. This changes on August 1, 2020, when Part II of Session law 2020-83 takes effect.

News Roundup
Clashes between federal law enforcement agents and protesters in Portland, Oregon, have been major national news this week after reports emerged that, in addition to extensive use of tear gas, stun grenades, and rubber bullets, there have been instances where unidentified federal agents in unmarked vans are arresting and interrogating people and later releasing them without filing criminal charges. Details about the extent of the alleged practice are hard to come by at the time of this writing, but late last week Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum sued the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the U.S. Marshals Service, and the Federal Protective Service arguing that the agencies’ actions are unconstitutional and asking for a temporary restraining order. Keep reading for more on this story and other news.
Case Summaries – North Carolina Court of Appeals (July 21, 2020)
This post summarizes opinions issued by the Court of Appeals of North Carolina on July 21, 2020.

Fourth Circuit Confronts Issues of Race and Policing
2020 has so far seen several court opinions addressing racial discrimination in criminal cases in one way or another. A majority of the U.S. Supreme Court in Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), struck down Louisiana’s practice of allowing non-unanimous jury verdicts, pointing to the law’s racist origins (Emily Coward blogged about the decision here). In State v. Bennett, ___ N.C. ___, 843 S.E.2d 222 (June 5, 2020) and State v. Hobbs, ___ N.C. ___, 841 S.E.2d 492 (May 1, 2020), the North Carolina Supreme Court sent back Batson claims for merits hearings at the trial court (before those decisions, Emily discussed the cases in part here). In State v. Copley, 374 N.C. 224 (April 3, 2020), the N.C. Supreme Court grappled with the issue of race in closing argument (Emily also wrote about the Court of Appeals opinion in that case here). Additionally, the court recently ruled in favor of two capital defendants in the Racial Justice Act litigation. See State v. Ramseur, ___ N.C. ___, 843 S.E.2d 106 (June 5, 2020) (holding repeal of RJA was unconstitutional as an ex post facto violation and granting evidentiary hearing on the merits of claims) and State v. Burke, ___ N.C. ___, 843 S.E.2d 246 (June 5, 2020) (same).
Turning to policing, the Court of Appeals recently weighed in on civil liability and the police, with a divided panel finding excessive force claims against the officer could proceed and affirming the trial court. See Bartley v. City of High Point, ___ N.C. App. ___, ___ S.E.2d ___ (July 7, 2020). Although the case did not involve allegations of racial bias, it focused on immunity issues that are common in such cases. At the Fourth Circuit, two recent decisions directly addressed issues of race and policing. The first case involved the denial of qualified immunity for officers involved in the fatal shooting of a black suspect; the second dealt with warrantless pedestrian stops. Both cases raise interesting and relevant concerns in the conversation on racial justice and police reform. The excessive force case is Estate of Wayne A. Jones v. City of Martinsburg, 961 F.3d 661 (June 9, 2020) and the warrantless stop case is U.S. v. Curry, ___ F.3d ___, 2020 WL 3980362 (July 15, 2020) (en banc). Today’s post examines the excessive force decision.

Changes in North Carolina Jail Populations During the COVID-19 Pandemic
We previously shared data on jail occupancy in North Carolina for 2018 (here) and 2019 (here). Responding to requests for information regarding changes in jail populations during the COVID-19 pandemic, with this report we offer information about 2020 jail populations. For an explanation regarding our data source and explanatory notes, please see our prior reports. Before we get to the numbers, we make two important points. First, beginning on April 6, 2020, a moratorium was placed on most inmate transfers from county jails to the state prison system.[1] As our colleague Jamie Markham explained, state officials imposed that moratorium to help manage the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, inmates ordered to serve active time were—unless sentenced to time served, released on appeal bond, or otherwise permitted to delay the start of their sentence—rolled into a “jail backlog.”[2] By the end of May 2020, there were over 1600 backlog inmates in county jails.[3] To the extent efforts were made to reduce populations in county jails, the moratorium would have impacted those initiatives. Second, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a suspension of jury trials. Charging new offenses, however, has continued. Thus, jails may be experiencing a backlog of defendants detained pretrial.