Recent blog posts - 152 of 396

In a series of posts I’ve been discussing bail reform, including highlighting pilot programs underway in North Carolina. In 2018, I worked with stakeholders in North Carolina’s Judicial District 30B (Haywood and Jackson counties) to help them identify and implement a basket of pretrial reforms. One of the implemented reforms is a new decisionmaking framework for determining conditions of pretrial release. Key features of the framework include:

• An easily implemented, stakeholder-created tool to quickly identify low-risk defendants who immediately can be released on non-financial conditions.
• A requirement that decisionmakers follow the statutory mandate and impose non-financial conditions unless they determine that such release will not reasonably assure appearance; will pose a danger of injury to any person; or is likely to result in the destruction of evidence, subornation of perjury, or intimidation of witnesses.
• Recommended maximum bond amounts for secured bonds and the requirement that ability to pay be considered in connection with imposition of that form of release.

In prior blog posts I outlined some of the reasons why stakeholders are interested in bail reform and some of the options that are being considered. In this one, I discuss one bail reform pilot project already underway in North Carolina.

North Carolina now sits ten months away from implementation of the Juvenile Justice Reinvestment Act (JJRA), widely referred to as “Raise the Age.” I had the opportunity to attend a summit hosted by Justice Initiatives in Charlotte last week focused on readiness for raise the age implementation. The recent report from the Juvenile Jurisdiction Advisory Committee (JJAC) is full of information about what still needs to be done for optimal implementation. The recommendations contain two major themes: provide legislative fixes to avoid unintended consequences and fully fund the new system.

Last week, the Supreme Court issued a per curiam opinion summarily reversing the Texas Court of Criminal appeals and finding that a death row inmate has an intellectual disability. The case doesn’t break new doctrinal ground but it offers some possible insights about how several Justices on the newly constituted Court are positioned on capital cases.

There were hearings this week before the State Board of Elections regarding the 9th Congressional District race involving alleged absentee ballot fraud.  At least one person, Lisa Britt, admitted that she collected dozens of absentee ballots and forged or backdated signatures on the ballots.  Candidate Mark Harris’s son John Harris, an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of North Carolina, testified that he warned his father that he believed that McCrae Dowless may have been engaging in illegal activity in connection with absentee ballots.  Wake County District Attorney Lorrin Freeman, whose office is involved in the Bladen County investigation in order to avoid potential conflicts of interest from the local DA’s office, said that none of the people testifying before the State Board of Elections has an immunity deal in the parallel criminal investigation.  Keep reading for more news.

The Supreme Court decided Timbs v. Indiana yesterday, holding that the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause is an incorporated protection applicable to the states under the Fourteenth Amendment. What does the decision mean for North Carolina?

The National Center for State Courts recently published an Ignition Interlock Report reviewing the latest research on ignition interlock programs. Two of the studies cited reported efficacy rates striking enough to attract the attention of any policy wonk interested in highway safety.

Back in December, the Fourth Circuit ruled on a habeas petition of Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald, denying relief. The case has been winding its way through federal courts for more than 40 years. I wanted to flag it for readers in this post, both as one of the more notorious North Carolina murder cases and as an opportunity to examine the legal principles of actual innocence claims in federal habeas. Fair warning, this post contains some minimal (but grisly) details of the killings.

In my last post, I discussed some of the reasons why stakeholders are interested in bail reform. In this one I explore some of the changes that are being implemented and evaluated.

Governor Roy Cooper announced this week that he will appoint North Carolina Supreme Court Associate Justice Cheri Beasley to replace Mark Martin as Chief Justice when he steps down from the bench later this month.  She will be the first black woman to serve as Chief Justice in North Carolina.  Beasley has been on the Supreme Court since 2012, and prior to joining the court she served on the North Carolina Court of Appeals and as a District Court Judge in Cumberland County.  Cooper will appoint another person to Beasley’s current seat at some point in the future.  Keep reading for more news.