Recent Blog Posts Page 206 on North Carolina Criminal Law Blog

The Fourth Amendment’s exclusionary rule generally bars the introduction of evidence seized in violation of its provisions. State constitutions, statutes, and rules also may bar the introduction of evidence even when the Fourth Amendment’s exclusionary rule does not.

The preparation and service of an inventory of items taken during the execution of a search warrant is not likely a Fourth Amendment requirement, and thus the exclusionary rule would be inapplicable to inventory issues. Cf. State v. Dobbins, 306 N.C. 342 (1982) (a search warrant’s return not being sworn was not a constitutional violation).

On the other hand, G.S. 15A-974 bars under some circumstances the introduction of evidence obtained in violation of Chapter 15A of the General Statutes. Evidence is to be excluded if: (1) it is obtained as a result of a “substantial” violation of Chapter 15A, and (2) the officer committing the violation did not act under an objectively reasonable good faith belief that his or her actions were lawful.

Last week, the North Carolina Court of Appeals in State v. Downey (September 6, 2016) considered a defendant’s argument that G.S. 15A-974 should have barred evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant because an officer allegedly did not comply with G.S. 15A-254, which essentially requires the completion an inventory of seized items and leaving a copy in the manner set out in the statute. The Downey ruling is the topic of this post.

Is it proper to charge a defendant separately with a greater offense and with a lesser-included offense? For example, is it proper to charge a defendant with robbery and with larceny arising out of the same taking, even though larceny is a lesser-included offense of robbery?

The Minneapolis Star Tribune reports that a Minnesota man, Danny Heinrich, confessed in federal court to abducting, sexually assaulting, and killing Jacob Wetterling nearly 27 years ago. Heinrich’s confession was part of a child pornography plea deal in which he will not be prosecuted for his crimes against Wetterling. Following Wetterling’s abduction, Congress enacted the Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act which required states to implement sex offender registries. Keep reading for more news.

My middle child is named Charles. The other day I referred to him as Charles in Charge.  He asked me why teachers and other adults always called him that. Ah, me. It seems my cultural references are dated.

Regardless of whether you are old enough to have had a Scott Baio poster in your room, if your work involves the courts, it is a good idea to know who is in charge of district court in your district. 

Suppose John is facing a deadly assault and fears that he will be killed or suffer great bodily harm. John has a firearm but, rather than shoot his assailant, he fires a warning shot. The shot goes awry, strikes John’s assailant, and kills him. May John rely on self-defense if charged with murder? The answer may be surprising.

The fifth and final episode of the first season of Beyond the Bench is now available. The episode features Jamie Markham interviewing Anne Precythe, the Director of Community Corrections. She shares […]

Labor day weekend has arrived and it’s time to kick back, relax, and be incredibly safe while navigating the roadways of the Old North State.  The Charlotte Observer reports that the number of U.S. and North Carolina traffic fatalities rose significantly in 2015, reversing a decades-long decline.  Take Shea’s advice and don’t speed on your way to show off your new swimwear while lounging landward of the mean high-water mark of the State’s beaches.  Planning to booze it in the Land of the Sky?  Make safe transportation choices or you’ll lose it because law enforcement is cracking down on drunk driving over the holiday.  Enjoy the long weekend and keep reading for more news.

A judge may remit unpaid fines and costs at any time. In certain circumstances.

True or False:  An officer does not have to be qualified as an expert to testify about horizontal gaze nystagmus in a hearing on a motion to suppress in an impaired driving case.

About a year ago, I wrote about State v. Hembree, 368 N.C. 2 (2015), a case in which the state supreme court reversed a murder conviction based on the State’s excessive use of Rule 404(b) evidence. This month, a divided court of appeals decided a case in the same vein. The case is State v. Reed.