BLOG
The North Carolina Supreme Court in State v. Chemuti, __ N.C. __, 920 S.E.2d 810 (2025), clarified the interplay between the statutory provisions in G.S. 132-1.4A governing release of certain […]
In October, we administered a class on DWI substantive law and procedure for District Court Judges and Magistrates. As part of that program, I took a group of judges to […]
Last week, I posted a short blog discussing the new category of violent offenses as defined by G.S. 15A-531(9). The post includes a chart of qualifying offenses for those who […]
For many years, it has been the rule in North Carolina that when multiple sentences of imprisonment are imposed, they run concurrently by default. That has been required by statute since 1977. G.S. 15A-1354. And that statute carried forward prior law that “sentences are to run concurrently unless otherwise specified.” Id. Official Commentary. Effective today, that default rule is removed.
December 1 is approaching, which means that many of the changes enacted by the General Assembly this session will be taking effect soon. Among the pending changes are those enacted by Iryna’s law (H 307), which I covered in greater detail in an earlier blog post. This follow-up post focuses on the new category of “violent offenses.”
The 2025 legislative session resulted in a small number of changes to the laws that govern delinquency proceedings. They include extended terms of probation and post-release supervision in some cases, […]
This post summarizes published criminal opinions released by the North Carolina Court of Appeals on November 19, 2025. In defendant’s trial for possession with intent to manufacture, sell, or deliver […]
Earlier this week, the Times reported that the federal prosecution of former FBI director James Comey for making false statements to and obstruction of Congress may be in jeopardy after […]
The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Article 1, Section 26 of the North Carolina Constitution prohibit the exercise of peremptory challenges to strike prospective jurors based on their race. […]
In U.S. v. Johnson, 148 F.4th 287 (4th Cir. 2025) (summarized here), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently rejected a Fourth Amendment challenge to a canine sniff at the front door of the defendant’s apartment. My colleagues Jeff Welty and Shea Denning have blogged about the issue of curtilage and multi-unit dwellings like apartment buildings in the past (here, here, and here), but Johnson is a good refresher on those principles. Read on for the details.