Search page/3: first appearance

Procedure in Juvenile Homicide Cases (September 27, 2022)

How does a case proceed when a juvenile is charged with a homicide offense? In classic lawyer fashion, the answer is that it depends. In almost all instances, the case will begin as a juvenile matter. However, the path the case follows once the juvenile case begins, and whether the case is ultimately adjudicated as a juvenile matter or prosecuted as a criminal matter, depends on the age of the juvenile at the time of the offense and the specific offense charged.

READ POST "Procedure in Juvenile Homicide Cases (September 27, 2022)"

New Report Shows Positive Results in Forsyth County Bail Project (July 25, 2022)

In January 2020, stakeholders in North Carolina’s Twenty-First Judicial District (Forsyth County) implemented a pretrial reform initiative designed to reduce unnecessary detentions of individuals charged with the lowest-level offenses. Specific attention was paid to those detained solely due to an inability to pay bail and not because of their risk to the community. To address this issue, local leaders developed and implemented a new structured decision-making tool for magistrates and judges to use when making bail decisions. Key elements of the tool include:

READ POST "New Report Shows Positive Results in Forsyth County Bail Project (July 25, 2022)"

2021 Criminal Legislative Summaries Now Available (December 15, 2021)

In this earlier blog post, I provided a then-current overview of criminal law and related legislation enacted by the North Carolina General Assembly this legislative session. Since then, there have been a few more bills enacted that affect criminal law, criminal procedure, and motor vehicle law, as well as some amendments to previously enacted bills.

READ POST "2021 Criminal Legislative Summaries Now Available (December 15, 2021)"

Interim Report: Judicial District 21 Bail Project (November 30, 2021)

Interim Report: Judicial District 21 Bail Project

In January 2020, North Carolina’s Twenty-First Judicial District (Forsyth County) implemented a consensus bail reform initiative in the form of a structured decision-making tool for magistrates and judges when making bail decisions. Some key features of the tool include:

  • creating a presumption for a condition other than a secured bond for Class 2 and 3 misdemeanors;
  • providing screening factors to identify individuals charged with Class 1 and A1 misdemeanors and Class F-I felonies who can safety be released pretrial;
  • affording no special presumption or screening for those charged with Class A-E felonies; and
  • embedding within the decision-making process the statutory requirement that conditions other than a secured bond must be imposed absent a risk of non-appearance, injury to any person, or interference with the criminal proceeding.

The new decision-making tool was developed by a stakeholder team that included judges, prosecutors, public defenders, clerks, magistrates, law enforcement leaders, and others. One of the working group’s primary goals was to reduce pretrial detentions of individuals who do not pose a pretrial risk but are detained solely due to inability to pay bail. The UNC School of Government Criminal Justice Innovation Lab supported stakeholders in the development and implementation of the new tool and, with support from local stakeholders, is conducting an empirical evaluation of its impact. We recently released a report (here) from the first year of the evaluation. This post summarizes key findings.

READ POST "Interim Report: Judicial District 21 Bail Project (November 30, 2021)"

Final Report: Judicial District 2 Bail Project (November 3, 2021)

In January 2020, North Carolina’s Second Judicial District (Beaufort, Hyde, Martin, Tyrrell, and Washington Counties) implemented two consensus bail reform initiatives. First, they implemented a structured decision-making tool for magistrates to use when making bail decisions. Among other things, the tool:

  • creates a presumption for conditions other than a secured bond for people charged with Class 3 misdemeanors;
  • provides screening factors to quickly identify individuals charged with intermediate-level cases (defined by local policy to include Class A1 – 2 misdemeanors and Class F – I felonies) who can be released on a condition other than a secured bond;
  • affords those charged with Class A – E felonies no special presumptions or screening; and
  • embeds within the decision-making process the statutory requirement that conditions other than a secured bond must be imposed absent a risk of non-appearance, injury to any person, or interference with the criminal proceeding.

Second, stakeholders implemented new first appearances for individuals detained on misdemeanor charges to ensure timely judicial review of bail.

These reforms were developed by a stakeholder team including judges, prosecutors, public defenders, clerks, magistrates, and law enforcement leaders. One of the team’s goals was to reduce pretrial detentions of individuals who do not pose a pretrial risk but are detained due to inability to pay bail. The UNC School of Government Criminal Justice Innovation Lab supported stakeholders in the development and implementation of reforms and, with support from local stakeholders, conducted an empirical evaluation of their implemented reforms. We recently released a final report (here) on that evaluation. This post summarizes key findings.

READ POST "Final Report: Judicial District 2 Bail Project (November 3, 2021)"

Updated Model Local Bail Policy (October 25, 2021)

The North Carolina General Statutes require the senior resident superior court judge to, in consultation with the chief district court judge or judges, issue a local bail policy. G.S. 15A-535(a). But doing so is no easy matter given the many statutory rules and exceptions and areas for discretionary policy choices. Christopher Tyner and I have tried to facilitate that task, with a North Carolina Model Local Bail Policy. We first issued the Model Policy in the Spring and we just posted an updated version, incorporating the latest legislative changes to the state’s bail statutes. The Model Policy can be found here; it’s the first item under “Implement.” Read on for details.

READ POST "Updated Model Local Bail Policy (October 25, 2021)"

An Overview of 2021 Criminal Law Legislation (September 7, 2021)

Each year the School of Government summarizes legislation enacted by the North Carolina General Assembly affecting criminal law and procedure and motor vehicle laws. We also explore selected legislation in more depth on this blog. Most criminal law legislation has an effective date of December 1 to allow the courts to prepare for the changes. What follows is a brief summary of the criminal law and related legislation with earlier effective dates enacted thus far during the 2021 legislative session. It isn’t everything the legislature has done, and by no means is it everything you need to know.

READ POST "An Overview of 2021 Criminal Law Legislation (September 7, 2021)"

News Roundup (September 3, 2021)

Tragedy struck at Mount Tabor High School this week where a student, William Chavis Raynard Miller, Jr., was shot and killed, apparently by another student.  As the Winston-Salem Journal reports, hundreds of people attended a vigil for Miller yesterday at Mount Tabor United Methodist Church.  Keep reading for more on this story and other news.

READ POST "News Roundup (September 3, 2021)"

News Roundup (August 27, 2021)

As the North State Journal reports, the General Assembly recently passed a bill that repeals North Carolina’s pistol purchase permit law.  Opinions on the bill are divided and it remains to be seen whether Governor Cooper will sign it into law.  Keep reading for more on this story and other news.

READ POST "News Roundup (August 27, 2021)"

With Enactment of SB 255, COVID-19 Emergency Directives Come to an End (June 21, 2021)

Earlier today, Chief Justice Paul Newby rescinded the two remaining COVID-19 Emergency Directives. The Chief Justice determined that the enactment of S.L. 2021-47 (Senate Bill 255) on Friday rendered unnecessary Emergency Directive 3, which authorized judicial officials to conduct proceedings that include remote audio and video transmissions and Emergency Directive 5, which permitted verification of pleadings and other documents by affirmation of the subscriber.

READ POST "With Enactment of SB 255, COVID-19 Emergency Directives Come to an End (June 21, 2021)"