By now, most court actors are familiar with the United States Supreme Court’s holding in Rodriguez v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 135 S. Ct. 1609 (April 21, 2015) (discussed in a prior post) that a law enforcement officer may not extend a traffic stop to investigate matters unrelated to the mission for the stop–that is, to address the traffic violation that warranted the stop and attend to related safety concerns–unless the extension is supported by reasonable suspicion. Defense attorneys and other court actors were curious to see how North Carolina appellate courts would analyze this significant new limitation on the scope of traffic stops.
Vinson, Voisine, and Misdemeanor Crimes of Domestic Violence
The United States Supreme Court recently decided a case about what counts as a “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” for purposes of the federal statute prohibiting individuals who have been convicted of such crimes from possessing firearms. I’ve had several questions about whether the ruling affects last year’s Fourth Circuit decision holding that North Carolina assaults generally don’t qualify as “misdemeanor crime[s] of domestic violence.” For the reasons set out below, I don’t think the Supreme Court case clearly overrules the Fourth Circuit’s decision.
News Roundup
Late last week five Dallas police officers were shot and killed in an ambush attack while working at a protest against the officer-involved shootings in Louisiana and Minnesota that the News Roundup reported last week. In addition to the officers who were killed, nine other officers and two civilians were injured. The Dallas Morning News has comprehensive coverage of the attack here. It has been reported that the gunman, Micah Xavier Johnson, “was upset about the recent police shootings” and said that “he wanted to kill white people.” Johnson had served in the military and carried out the ambush from an elevated position using an assault rifle; he was killed by police using a bomb robot after a standoff. The incident reportedly is the deadliest attack on U.S. law enforcement since September 11 and is a reminder of the danger officers across the country face while they work to keep communities safe. Keep reading for more news.
Another New Rule for CRV Jail Credit
A legislative session wouldn’t be complete without a new jail credit rule for confinement in response to violation (CRV).
Sheyenne’s Law Stiffens Penalty for Impaired Boating Causing Serious Injury or Death
The man who authorities say was operating the boat that crashed into 17-year-old Sheyenne Marshall while she was knee-boarding on Lake Norman on July 4, 2015, killing her, faces charges for boating while impaired, a Class 2 misdemeanor, operating a vessel in a reckless manner, a Class 2 misdemeanor, and involuntary manslaughter, a Class F felony. After the accident, Marshall’s family lobbied the legislature for stiffer penalties for impaired boating. Less than a year after Marshall was killed, the General Assembly enacted Sheyenne’s law, which increases the penalties for impaired boating that causes death or serious injury to another.
Pole Camera Surveillance Under the Fourth Amendment
Placing a video camera on a utility pole and conducting surveillance can be a useful law enforcement tool to gather information without requiring an in-person presence by officers at all times. But this tool may be subject to the Fourth Amendment restrictions. This post reviews the evolving case law, particularly since the United States Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Jones, 132 S. Ct. 945 (2012).
Jeff Welty in a 2013 post reviewed video surveillance generally, not just pole cameras, and discussed Jones and the few cases decided in light of its ruling. This post, after reviewing Jones, will discuss a few pole camera cases decided in federal courts since his post and whether officers should seek approval from a court before conducting pole camera surveillance.
Announcing Our New Podcast: Beyond the Bench
On behalf of the North Carolina Judicial College and the School of Government, I’m pleased to announce the launch of a new podcast about the court system. It’s called Beyond the Bench, and it is intended to be of interest to judges, lawyers, clerks, officers, and others who work in and around the court system. This post provides more detail about the project, but if you are ready to listen, you can get the podcast on the web here, or through the iTunes podcast store or on Stitcher.
News Roundup
Two officer-involved fatal shootings are making national headlines this week, in part because video of each shooting has been published on the internet. On Tuesday, Alton Sterling was shot and killed by a Baton Rouge police officer during an encounter at a convenience store where Sterling made a living selling CDs in the parking lot; Sterling reportedly had brandished a gun which prompted a 911 call and the police response. The front page of The Advocate, a Louisiana newspaper, has comprehensive coverage of the story. Wednesday, Philando Castile was fatally shot by a police officer during a traffic stop in a suburb of Saint Paul, Minnesota. Details of the story were developing at the time of writing. The New York Times has an early report here which suggests that a passenger in the car livestreamed the aftermath of the shooting to Facebook.
New Probation Condition for Felons: Mandatory Waiver of Extradition
In Session Law 2016-77, the General Assembly made some changes the law of probation, post-release supervision, and parole. Though styled as “an act to amend provisions of the Justice Reinvestment Act,” the latest legislation makes some changes that go beyond the 2011 JRA. Today’s post summarizes one of the changes: a new requirement for supervised felony probationers to make a prospective waiver of extradition.
Utah v. Strieff and the Attenuation Doctrine
(Author’s note: The concluding paragraph of this post was amended after its publication to include the number of outstanding warrants and orders for arrest on July 1, 2016.)
Every year, the June trifecta throws me off my game. First, school lets out so I have to acclimate to a schedule of camps that vary in operating hours, locations, necessary equipment, and participating child. Second, the district court judges convene for their annual conference where I join them to oversee the program and to lecture about criminal law cases decided since the previous October. Third, the United States Supreme Court winds up its term, invariably deciding significant criminal law cases the very week of the conference. Since judges are no better than my children in cutting me a little slack (Am I really the only mother who didn’t know you needed to bring a racket to tennis camp?), they bombarded me the day the conference began to ask about the attenuation doctrine and its application in Utah v. Strieff (decided the day before). I mumbled something about the Christian burial speech and quickly asked how their summers were going. Now that June is behind me, I’ve collected my thoughts and am prepared to talk about Strieff.