New Cumulative Supplement to Arrest, Search, and Investigation in North Carolina and Recent Cases Since Its Publication

linkedin
Share on Google+
Share on Reddit
Share on Tumblr
Download PDF

The 2014 Cumulative Supplement to Arrest, Search, and Investigation in North Carolina (4th ed. 2011) is now available. It is called a cumulative supplement because it includes the material in the 2013 supplement so you only need the book and the 2014 cumulative supplement to be current. You may order it online here or contact the School of Government Bookstore Manager at 919.966.4120. Continue reading for additional details.

The Administrative Office of the Court recently purchased copies of this supplement and will distribute them to the following judicial officials: (1) superior court judges; (2) district court judges; (3) district attorneys and assistant district attorneys; (4) public defenders and assistant public defenders; (5) magistrates; and (6) selected IDS and AOC officers. Distribution will begin the week after receipt and should be complete by the end of October 2014. Books will be delivered with regular supply orders. Please direct questions about AOC distribution among judicial personnel to Joe Slate at 919.890.1532.

New Cases on Obtaining Historical Cell-Site Information Since the Publication of the 2014 Cumulative Supplement. Anyone who works in the criminal justice field knows that criminal case law rulings change more frequently than in any other legal field. So it is not surprising that I already need to update a discussion of a subject (historical cell-site information) that appears on page 34 of the 2014 cumulative supplement.

The book noted that the case law is evolving, but the view of most (but not all) courts is a court order based on the federal statutory standard, which is less than probable cause, is sufficient to obtain historical cell-site information. I have noted in the 2014 cumulative supplement, however, that the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in United States v. Davis, 754 F.3d 1205 (11th Cir. 2014), had ruled, in light of various Justices’ views of the Fourth Amendment’s reasonable expectation of privacy in the GPS case of United States v. Jones, 132 S. Ct. 945 (2012), that the Fourth Amendment requires a search warrant or court order based on probable cause to obtain historical cell-site information. After the cumulative supplement had been sent to the printer, the Seventh Circuit voted on September 4, 2014 (2014 WL 4358411), to vacate the Davis ruling and rehear it en banc (full court of judges). In addition, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in United States v. Guerrero, 2014 WL 4476565, disagreed with the initial Davis ruling and held on September 11, 2014, that the Fourth Amendment is not violated when officers comply with the federal statutory standard when seeking to obtain historical cell-site information.

If ultimately there are conflicting federal appellate court rulings on this issue, it is likely the United States Supreme Court will decide the issue by granting a petition of certiorari to review one or more lower court rulings. Of course, the Court may decide to grant certiorari even if there are not conflicting rulings. Stay tuned.

2 comments on “New Cumulative Supplement to Arrest, Search, and Investigation in North Carolina and Recent Cases Since Its Publication

  1. Available only to the privileged class that can afford it, and of course all government agencies free of charge.

    It is not made ‘publically’ available to all Citizens so that they can review those laws rules regulations they and or their servants in government are subject to. Then they claim that ‘ignorance of our (governments) laws’ (which are not publically available without payment)is no excuse.

  2. North Carolina has 100 Counties. When you provide one set to each of the officials listed above (1) superior court judges; (2) district court judges; (3) district attorneys and assistant district attorneys; (4) public defenders and assistant public defenders; (5) magistrates; and (6) selected IDS and AOC officers I suspect it amounts to over a 1000 volumes the tax payers are buying for those persons.

    What is unreasonable about purchasing 100 more volumes on OUR dime and placing them at a Public Library in each of the 100 Counties?

    I suppose it just would not do for the Citizens to have equal access to the governing laws.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.