This post summarizes published criminal law cases released by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals during January 2025. Cases of potential interest to state practitioners are summarized monthly. Previous summaries of Fourth Circuit cases are available here.
Children and Consent Searches
Some time ago, I received an email from a researcher asking whether a minor may consent to the search of his or her cell phone. The question made me realize how little I knew about children’s authority to consent to searches more generally. So I cracked some law books, and wrote this post as a primer for anyone who may be as uninformed as I was.
News Roundup
After a two-week evidentiary hearing last February, and closing arguments delivered in August, Superior Court Judge Wayland Sermons Jr. issued a 120-page order concluding that racism significantly affected the 2009 Johnston County trial of Hasson Bacote that resulted in the imposition of the death penalty. Bacote first challenged his sentence fifteen years ago under the now-repealed Racial Justice Act. In his order, Judge Sermons stated that the evidence showed a “consistent picture of the role race has played in jury selection throughout Johnston County and Prosecutorial District 11, and in the capital cases tried by [the] prosecutor…” After Governor Cooper commuted Bacote’s sentence to life imprisonment last December, it was unclear what would happen with the pending litigation. Judge Sermons evidently concluded that it was appropriate to make a ruling, stating that the voluminous “statistical, cultural, historical, social science, and other evidence produced in the [Bacote] case” would serve as a guide to courts considering the particular facts of future cases. Attorneys for the State said they planned to appeal the ruling.
Read on for more criminal law news.
Jail Credit During a Pending Post-Release Supervision Violation
There are about 10,000 people on post-release supervision (PRS) in North Carolina. Some of them get charged with a new crime. That new charge usually prompts the issuance of a PRS warrant. And when a person is arrested on one of those, it is generally understood that there is no entitlement to bail. So, even if the new charge is relatively minor, the post-release supervisee will often be held in jail until the new charge is resolved. A question that comes up again and again is whether the defendant is entitled to jail credit against the new conviction for the time spent detained on the pending PRS violation.
Congratulations to Newly Certified Magistrates
For most citizens in North Carolina magistrates are the “first face” of the judicial system. They serve the public with professionalism, continually staying updated on the ever-evolving civil and criminal laws. Teaching magistrates is a very fulfilling part of my job, because they are always eager to learn, and they readily participate in class. In … Read more
Case Summaries: N.C. Court of Appeals (Feb. 5, 2025)
This post summarizes the published criminal opinions from the North Carolina Court of Appeals released on February 5, 2025. These summaries will be added to Smith’s Criminal Case Compendium, a free and searchable database of case summaries from 2008 to the present.
News Roundup
Tuesday night, Pam Bondi was confirmed by the United States Senate as the Attorney General of the United States. Bondi previously served as Attorney General of Florida. The Senate voted 54 – 46, with all Republicans plus John Fetterman of Pennsylvania voting in favor of confirmation, and all other Democrats voting against. NPR reports here that Bondi immediately issued 14 memoranda that, among other things, lift the federal moratorium on executions; establish a task force on antisemitism and justice for the victims of Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attack on Israel; and form a working group regarding the weaponization of federal agencies for political ends. Keep reading for more news.
Case Summary: U.S. Supreme Court (Jan. 21, 2025)
This post summarizes a criminal law decision published by the U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 21, 2025.
Pretrial Release of Seized Motor Vehicles
In every case where a person is charged with felony speeding to elude arrest pursuant to G.S. 20-141.5(b) or (b1), the motor vehicle driven is subject to seizure and forfeiture. This is also true in DWI cases where, at the date of offense, the defendant’s driver’s license was revoked for an impaired driving revocation or the defendant did not have a valid license nor insurance. When in district court, these cases have expedited calendaring requirements (discussed here). This is in part to preserve the vehicle’s value while the case is pending. Upon seizure, the vehicle is usually first towed to a local storage facility, then transferred to the facilities of a state contractor within a few days. There are fees for towing, as well as accruing fees for storage. Whether the motor vehicle is released to its owner, a lienholder, or forfeited to the county board of education, these towing and storage fees must be paid. Often, these fees are paid out of the proceeds of the sale of the vehicle. While expediting the underlying case towards resolution is one way to minimize these fees, another is release of the vehicle before case disposition. This post addresses the circumstances under which a vehicle may be fully released pretrial and does not have to be brought back for a later forfeiture hearing.