This post summarizes the published criminal opinions from the Supreme Court of North Carolina released on October 20, 2023. These summaries will be added to Smith’s Criminal Case Compendium, a free and searchable database of case summaries from 2008 to the present.
Statutory Changes Related to Juvenile Interrogation and Secure Custody Orders
This post covers recent statutory changes related to the custodial interrogation of youth who are 16 and 17 years of age and to the issuance and execution of secure custody orders in delinquency cases. All of these changes are contained in Session law 2023-114 and will apply to offenses committed on or after December 1, 2023.
Does Consent to Search a Home Include Consent to Search Phones and Computers Located Inside?
Normally, the Fourth Amendment requires that police obtain a search warrant before officers may search a person’s phone or computer. But the person can waive his or her Fourth Amendment rights by consenting to a search without a warrant. The scope of a person’s consent is determined by what a “typical reasonable person [would] have understood by the exchange between the officer and the suspect.” Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U.S. 248 (1991). Applying that test, if an officer asks a suspect for consent to search the suspect’s home, and the suspect agrees, does that allow the officer to search any digital devices located inside the residence?
News Roundup
The Colorado Supreme Court upheld the search of Google users’ keyword history to identify suspects in a 2020 fatal arson fire. The Court cautioned it was not making a “broad proclamation” on the constitutionality of such warrants and emphasized it was ruling on the facts of just this one case. At issue before the court was a search warrant from Denver police requiring Google to provide the IP addresses of anyone who had searched over 15 days for the address of the home that was set on fire, killing five people.
According to this AP News article, one suspect asked the court to throw the evidence out because it violated the Fourth Amendment’s ban on unreasonable searches and seizures by being overbroad and not being targeted against a specific person suspected of a crime. The Court ruled that the suspect had a constitutionally protected privacy interest in his Google search history even though it was only connected with an IP address and not his name. While assuming that the warrant was “constitutionally defective” for not specifying an “individualized probable cause,” the Court said it would not throw out the evidence because police were acting in good faith under what was known about the law at the time.
Keep reading for more criminal law news.
Case Summaries: N.C. Court of Appeals (Oct. 17, 2023)
This post summarizes the published criminal opinions from the North Carolina Court of Appeals released on October 17, 2023. These summaries will be added to Smith’s Criminal Case Compendium, a free and searchable database of case summaries from 2008 to the present.
Substitute Analyst Testimony and Smith v. Arizona
I mentioned in a recent News Roundup that the U.S. Supreme Court granted review in Smith v. Arizona. The case tees up a question that has been lingering since at least 2012: Does the Confrontation Clause permit the admission of substitute forensic analyst testimony? This issue arises when a forensic report is prepared for use in a criminal case, but the testing analyst is not available for trial. Instead of admitting the report through the original analyst, the State calls a different expert—one not necessarily involved in the original testing—to offer an opinion about the accuracy of the report. North Carolina generally allows such testimony, but there is a split among jurisdictions on the issue. Smith has the potential to alter the legal landscape here and elsewhere regarding the use of substitute analyst testimony, so today’s post dives into the legal issues and potential impact of the case.
Court of Appeals Rules That Consent to Search Backpack, Given after Repeated Requests, Was Not Voluntary
Last month, the Court of Appeals ruled that police coerced a suspect into agreeing to let them search his backpack. Many of the traditional hallmarks of coercion, such as threatening language or the brandishing of weapons, were absent in this case, making it noteworthy for officers, prosecutors, and defense attorneys alike. The case is State v. Wright, __ N.C. App. __, 2023 WL 5925671 (N.C. Ct. App. Sept. 12, 2023), and this post discusses it in greater detail than the summary previously posted on the blog.
News Roundup
Most of the news I’ve gathered this week is from right here in North Carolina, but I’ll start with an interesting story from Oklahoma. The AP reports here that “A new Oklahoma judge could lose her job for sending more than 500 texts to her bailiff during a murder trial, including messages mocking the prosecutor, praising the defense attorney and calling a key witness a liar.” Judge Traci Soderstrom seems to have spent much of her time texting and scrolling through social media while presiding over a trial involving the murder of a two year old. Some of the texts were crass and tasteless enough that I won’t repeat them. She has acknowledged that her texting “probably could have waited.” The Chief Justice of the state supreme court has recommended her removal. Keep reading for more news.
New Pattern Jury Instructions Available Along with Updated Online Library
Each year the School of Government publishes new and revised pattern jury instructions for civil, criminal, and motor vehicle negligence cases. Those instructions are created and compiled by the North Carolina Conference of Superior Court Judges Committee on Pattern Jury Instructions. The 2023 updates are available for free download here. Among this year’s changes are new civil instructions related to breach of fiduciary duty and new and revised criminal instructions for the arson offenses created by S.L. 2022-8 and for the changes to organized retail theft crimes enacted by S.L. 2022-30.
Keep reading to learn about improvements to the School’s online library of pattern jury instructions and about the School’s plan to publish comprehensive, searchable electronic versions of pattern jury instructions in future years.