BLOG
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.
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.
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.
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.
[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?
In the 2015 case State v. Hicks, __ N.C. App. __, 768 S.E.2d 373 (2015), after holding that the trial court committed plain error in its jury instructions, the N.C. Court of Appeals urged the General Assembly to clarify the relevant law:
North Carolina sentencing law allows multiple convictions to be consolidated for sentencing. Consolidation of felonies is governed by G.S. 15A-1340.15(b); G.S. 15A-1340.22(b) covers misdemeanors. The rule is the same for both types of crimes: when you consolidate offenses for judgment, the court imposes a single judgment, with a single sentence appropriate for the defendant’s most serious conviction. It’s a pretty extraordinary thing when you think about it. Notwithstanding all the fine-tuned, mandatory math that goes into the sentencing of a single offense under Structured Sentencing, the law allows virtually unfettered discretion to disregard all but the most serious offense for a defendant convicted of multiple crimes. Today’s post collects some of the rules for consolidation.
Here’s a question that comes up from time to time: May a search warrant issue for a residence in which an apparent suicide has taken place, in order to rule out the possibility of foul play? Generally, I don’t think so, for the reasons given below.
I can’t recall if I’ve mentioned it before on this blog, but I was on the debate team in high school and college, and I coach a high school debate team now. I’ve coached several students who went on to debate for Harvard, two of whom won collegiate national championships and one of whom won a world championship, a rare feat for an American debater. So I was pretty surprised to read this article from The Guardian, which reports that a team of New York prison inmates defeated a team of Harvard debaters a couple of weeks back. Kudos to the inmates. I know from experience that those Harvard kids are sharp.
With the General Assembly done for the year, it’s time to post an updated sex offender registration and monitoring flow chart. A major reorganization of the sex crimes in Chapter 14 necessitated more changes than usual.