Recent blog posts

Over the weekend, the judge presiding over Bill Cosby’s sexual assault trial declared a mistrial after the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict. I hadn’t followed the case very closely and my knee-jerk reaction was, “wait, fifty women have accused this guy of sexual assault and he didn’t get convicted?” As I thought more about it, I began to wonder how many accusers — other than Andrea Constand, the alleged victim in the case — were allowed to testify against Cosby. It turns out that it was only one.

On Wednesday, a man with a rifle ambushed Republican members of Congress at a park in Virginia as the lawmakers held a morning baseball practice in preparation for the annual Congressional Baseball Game, which was held yesterday.  Five people were wounded, including House Majority Whip Steve Scalise of Louisiana, who was in critical condition at the time of writing.  Two Capitol Police officers engaged the gunman in a shootout where he was fatally injured.  The gunman, James T. Hodgkinson, seemingly was motivated by political animus – he reportedly asked whether the lawmakers were Democrats or Republicans before the attack.  The Washington Post has comprehensive coverage of the incident.  Keep reading for more news.

Over two years ago I said I would someday try to sort North Carolina’s reportable sex crimes into the tiers set out in the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA). Today’s the day.

Two of last week’s opinions from the North Carolina Supreme Court address significant legal issues arising in impaired driving cases. In State v. Godwin, the supreme court reversed the court of appeals, holding that the trial court was not required to explicitly recognize a law enforcement officer as an expert witness before the officer could testify to the results of a Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) test.  In State v. Romano, the supreme court upheld the court of appeals’ determination that the withdrawal of blood from an unconscious impaired driving defendant violated the Fourth Amendment, notwithstanding a state statute authorizing this practice.

Here’s a question that arose during a recent class: Suppose that a party in a criminal case seeks to introduce forensic evidence from a discipline of questionable validity, such as bite mark analysis. The lawyer on the other side isn’t aware that the technique has been the subject of scientific criticism and doesn’t object. Must the trial judge nonetheless assess the reliability of the proposed testimony before admitting it?

Live and photo lineups and show-ups implicate constitutional and statutory requirements. This post will focus on the statutory requirements. For constitutional requirements, see pages 594-98 in Arrest, Search, and Investigation in North Carolina (5th ed. 2016).

Former FBI director James Comey’s testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee regarding the FBI’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election is without question the biggest news of the week.  CBS News says that bars across the country opened early to serve drinks to customers while they watched the testimony live.  The Chicago Tribune says that workplace productivity was expected to plummet Thursday, much as it does during March Madness, as workers tuned into the testimony at their desks.  Keep reading for more news.

After nearly 18 years at the helm, Judge Erwin Spainhour is stepping down as chairman of the North Carolina Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission. Today’s post takes a moment to recognize his service and the good work done by the Commission under his leadership.

The general rule for a driver involved in a crash in which a person is injured or at least $1,000 in property damages occurs is this: The driver must stop his vehicle at the scene and must remain there with the vehicle until a law enforcement officer completes the crash investigation or authorizes the driver to leave and the vehicle to be removed. There is, however, an exception to this rule. That exception led to yesterday’s court of appeals opinion in State v. Scaturro, reversing a driver’s conviction on charges that he left the scene of a crash.

Over the weekend I indulged my passion for music, which started me thinking about the overlap between music and my day job at the School of Government—in other words, songs that involve criminal law. Once I started, it wasn’t hard to come up with several examples, in different genres and about different phases of criminal proceedings. My choices, below, show that we are products of our eras; they date me. What songs about criminal law stand out for you?