How is a statute supposed to read when the General Assembly amends it in May and then amends it again in July without acknowledging the prior amendment? Let me clarify with an example.
Eyewitness Identification Reform Act Extended to Show-Ups
Effective December 1, S.L. 2015-212 extends the Eyewitness Identification Reform Act, G.S. 15A-284.52, to cover show-ups. But the bill leaves the status of photographic show-ups in doubt and contains a strange provision regarding law enforcement officers as eyewitnesses. This post unpacks the new law.
The Courts’ Limited Role in Post-Release Supervision
Before 2011, post-release supervision (PRS) was a bit of a novelty. Back then, only Class B1–E felons received PRS, and they account for only 15 percent of all felons. For offenses committed on and after December 1, 2011, the Justice Reinvestment Act amended the law to require post-release supervision for all felons who serve active time, regardless of offense class. As a result, there are now close to 10,000 post-release supervisees in North Carolina. More offenders means more questions. And one of the most common questions is what role, if any, the courts have in the administration of post-release supervision. The answer: very little.
News Roundup
It’s a ritual of fall: one faculty member or another receives an inquiry about whether registered sex offenders covered by G.S. 14-208.18 may attend a county fair or the State Fair. I tend to doubt that most agricultural fairs are intended “primarily” for kids, which would make them per se off limits, but I think it would be awfully difficult for a covered offender to make his or her way around most such fairs without running afoul of the 300-foot rule and/or the prohibition against being present at places minors gather for “regularly scheduled . . . programs.” We don’t have a case yet discussing sex offenders at fairs, but we may soon. WRAL reports here that a sex offender has been arrested after allegedly posing as a ride inspector at the “kiddie land” portion of the State Fair. Weirdly, WRAL also reports that a second sex offender has been arrested after flying a camera-equipped drone over the fair.
Consecutive Splits
I am asked from time to time whether imprisonment terms for special probation (split sentences) may be run consecutively. I think they probably may.
North Carolina Bans Sale of Powdered Alcohol
I didn’t even know powdered alcohol was a thing. Turns out, it is not only a thing, but, in North Carolina and in many other states it is now an unlawful thing–even though it isn’t actually available on the market.
Second Circuit Decides Major Gun Control Case
The Second Circuit just decided a case regarding gun control legislation in Connecticut and New York. It’s important in its own right, and because it concerns two issues that the Supreme Court could soon take up: bans on assault weapons and on high-capacity magazines.
New Edition of Online Relief Guide
At long last I have completed the 2015 edition of my online guide to relief from a criminal conviction. This free guide, available here on the School of Government’s website, covers the various forms of relief available under North Carolina law, including expunctions, certificates of relief, and other procedures. It includes changes made by the General Assembly through the end of its 2015 legislative session.
News Roundup
I’m going to admit something here: I’ve never called an Uber. Or summoned an Uber. Used an Uber? Whatever. I’m just old fashioned, I guess. The same cannot be said of Dashawn Cochran, who was recently arrested in Maryland after allegedly robbing a store at gunpoint and escaping via Uber. Very cutting edge! But not successful. It turns out that while Uber drivers are readily available, they’re not highly motivated to try to elude the police. CNET has the story here.
Herndon v. Herndon and Pleading the Fifth
[Author’s note: The North Carolina Supreme Court in Herndon v. Herndon, 368 N.C. 826 (2016), reversed the court of appeals’ decision discussed below. The state supreme court held that the trial court’s actions did not amount to a constitutional violation. The court concluded that the defendant did not invoke the privilege against self-incrimination and the trial court inquired into matters that were within the scope of the defendant’s testimony on direct examination.]
A recent court of appeals decision has stirred up a lot of discussion on our hall about the scope of the Fifth Amendment right to be free from self-incrimination. The case is Herndon v. Herndon, __ N.C. App. __ (October 6, 2015), and it arose from a defendant’s appeal from the entry of a domestic violence protective order against her. Before the defendant testified in the hearing to determine whether acts of domestic violence occurred, the presiding judge cautioned the defendant’s attorney: “I’m not doing no Fifth Amendment.” There’s really no question that the warning was, as one appellate judge put it, “less than artful,” but did it violate the defendant’s rights?