North Carolina Criminal Law Blog

Like everyone else, our work at the School of Government has been altered by the COVID-19 pandemic. We have written, and will continue to write, about executive orders from the Governor, directives from the Chief Justice, and other pandemic-related issues. But, like many of you, our regular nonpandemic-related work continues. The appellate courts continue to decide cases, and questions about how those cases apply to ongoing litigation still arise. We usually discuss recent case law with criminal law practitioners at conferences held around the state. Right now, those aren’t happening. For those of you who are craving a bit of the regular fare, we are offering a special Friday feature. Jamie Markham, Jonathan Holbrook, and I will host an online forum this Friday, March 27, 2020, at 1 p.m. to talk about recent criminal law decisions by our appellate courts. Read on for instructions on how you can tune in to our hour-long program.

The novel coronavirus pandemic has drastically altered the lives of all Americans in the space of just a week.  Shea and Jamie blogged on Monday about limitations on court proceedings designed to minimize close interactions and the correctional system’s response to the crises.  Shea was back on the blog again on Thursday discussing recent limitations on the operation of bars and restaurants as well as an extension of certain court filing deadlines.  We appreciate the work of state and local officials, court system actors, and law enforcement and other emergency response agencies during this trying time.  Stay safe and keep reading for more news.

Executive Order 118. Governor Cooper issued Executive Order 118 on Tuesday, directing bars to close and restricting restaurants to selling food only for carry-out, drive through, delivery, and onsite consumption […]

This post summarizes the published criminal cases from the North Carolina Court of Appeals issued on March 17, 2020.

In late 2019, bail litigation came to North Carolina. I have written before about successful federal bail litigation in other jurisdictions, including a decision holding that the bail system in Harris County, Texas was unconstitutional. Similar litigation is now underway in our state, and appears to be headed towards a consent preliminary injunction.

Shea’s earlier post discussed the court system’s response to COVID-19. This post shares some related information from the state correctional system.

On Friday, Chief Justice Cheri Beasley entered two emergency directives to reduce the spread of infection from COVID-19. On Saturday, Governor Roy Cooper entered an executive order prohibiting mass gatherings and ordering the statewide closure of public schools.

On Tuesday, an officer-involved shooting in Raleigh set off protests in the city that were fueled in part by social media postings in the immediate hours after the event.  A Raleigh police officer shot Javier Torres after responding to a 911 call reporting that a man was displaying a gun at a local strip mall.  Soon after the shooting, rumors posted on Facebook motivated protests in downtown Raleigh, at the police chief’s home, and at the governor’s mansion.  Keep reading for more on this story and other news.

My colleagues and predecessors here at the School of Government have written about video evidence many times over the years, summarizing the basic rules and significant cases in posts available here, here, here, here, and here. Recently, though, I've been getting questions about a relatively new but increasingly common type of video evidence: high-tech, app-controlled, and remotely stored videos taken by automated devices ranging from doorbell cameras to wifi-enabled, cloud-connected, teddy bear spy cams. Do the old rules still work the same way for these new video tools? Is it substantive or illustrative evidence? If it's substantive, how is it authenticated? Is a lay witness qualified to testify about how these cameras work? Does the proponent need the original video? Come to think of it, what is the "original" of a video that exists only as bits of data floating somewhere in the cloud...?

Spring is only a few weeks away. Soon preparation will begin for the rites of the season, among them pruning, planting, and, of course, prom. A few weeks ago, I chaperoned a dance at my son’s high school. (I elected not to tell him that I was chaperoning, so you can imagine his reaction when he saw me there. For more about that, please check out my parenting blog.) When I walked into the gymnasium, I saw tables laden with dozens of bright yellow flashlight-shaped devices. The school had not stockpiled flashlights for gazing into dark corners. Instead, these were portable breath testing instruments awaiting samples of air drawn from the deep lungs of teenagers. Every student seeking admission to the dance was required to submit a breath sample. Only students who registered no alcohol concentration were eligible to attend the dance. After the dance, someone asked me whether it was lawful for a school to require students to submit to a breath test before admitting them to a school function. My answer? Yes. My reasoning? See below.