Reminiscent of the Wars of the Roses, our Supreme Court’s recent opinion in State v. Lancaster, __ N.C. __, 895 S.E.2d 337 (2023), concerns an offense first codified in 1328 during the reign of Edward III. The common law crime of going armed to the terror of the public, our Supreme Court there held, does not require allegation or proof that the conduct occurred on a public highway; hence, there was no facial defect in an indictment omitting this putative element. Other elements not explicitly stated in the same indictment – for the purpose of terrifying, in a manner that would naturally terrify – were “clearly inferable.” This post examines Lancaster to ascertain the direction of our Supreme Court’s avowed retreat from archaic pleading requirements.
Book Review: Going Infinite
Michael Lewis is a celebrated author whose work has repeatedly topped the best-seller lists. His most famous book is Moneyball, which chronicles the analytics revolution in baseball. But his most controversial – perhaps even his most hated – book is also his most recent: Going Infinite, which chronicles the rise and fall of the cryptocurrency exchange FTX and the exploits of its founder, Sam Bankman-Fried.
News Roundup
Criminal law news is seldom cheery. That said, I am particularly saddened to begin the first news roundup of 2024 with a story of a school shooting.
School was set to resume yesterday in Perry, Iowa, following the winter break. But before the opening bell rang at Perry High School on Thursday morning, authorities say 17-year-old Dylan Butler, a student at the school, opened fire, killing a sixth-grader and wounding five others. Law enforcement officials reported that Butler was armed with a pump-action shotgun and a small handgun and that he was found dead inside the school with a self-inflicted gunshot wound.
The Associated Press reports that the shooting “occurred in the backdrop of Iowa’s looming first-in-the-nation presidential caucuses.” GOP candidate Vivek Ramaswamy had a campaign event that was scheduled to occur yesterday morning less than two miles away from Perry High School. He canceled the event to hold a prayer and discussion with area residents.
Continue reading for more criminal law news.
Case Summaries: N.C. Court of Appeals (Dec. 19, 2023, and Jan. 2, 2024)
This post summarizes the published criminal opinions from the North Carolina Court of Appeals released on December 19, 2023, and January 2, 2024. These summaries will be added to Smith’s Criminal Case Compendium, a free and searchable database of case summaries from 2008 to the present.
Case Summaries: N.C. Supreme Court (Dec. 15, 2023)
This post summarizes the published criminal opinions from the Supreme Court of North Carolina released on December 15, 2023. These summaries will be added to Smith’s Criminal Case Compendium, a free and searchable database of case summaries from 2008 to the present.
When Child Abuse or Neglect Ends in a Fatality, What Does the Public Have a Right to Know?
The following post is authored by SOG faculty member Kristi Nickodem. A version of this post is also available on the Coates’ Canons and On the Civil Side SOG blogs.
When abuse or neglect leads to the death of a child, concerned citizens, public officials, and members of the media often have questions about the circumstances leading up to the fatality. A North Carolina statute, G.S. 7B-2902, requires any public agency—including law enforcement agencies and departments of social services—to disclose a written summary of particular “findings and information” upon request with respect to child fatalities that meet certain criteria. Within five working days of when a public agency receives such a request, the agency is required to consult with the district attorney who is involved in the case concerning the child’s fatality or near fatality to determine what information may be released. This blog post discusses the responsibilities of public agencies to disclose information under G.S. 7B-2902, circumstances in which information may be withheld from public disclosure, and the role of the district attorney in consulting on what information may be released.
News Roundup
This will be the last news roundup of the year. We’ll likely have a post or two early next week and then go dark for the holidays, returning in early January. We appreciate your readership this year, as well as your feedback, your topic suggestions, and all the other ways that you participate in the blog community. However you may celebrate the season, we wish you a happy and restful break. Read on for a selection of the week’s news.
Annual Report from the Judicial College (2022-2023)
The North Carolina Judicial College was founded in 2005 to expand the education and training the School of Government has provided for judicial branch officials since the 1930s. Through the Judicial College, the School now offers more courses of interest to mid-and later-career officials and provides that training in small group, interactive educational settings.
We highlight some of those courses, the judicial officials who have participated in them, and our award-winning faculty in our latest annual report. We thought you might like to check it out.
Is Rule 608(b) a Rule of Exclusion?
In State v. Hamilton, No. COA22-847 (N.C. Ct. App. Nov. 21, 2023), the Court of Appeals held the prosecutor’s cross-examination of the defendant about statements he made in open court “was an inappropriate form of impeachment.” Slip Op. p. 13. In support of this conclusion, the Court of Appeals cited, among other things, Evidence Rule 608(b). That rule generally bars evidence of specific instances of a witness’s conduct for the purpose of attacking or supporting his credibility; however, specific instances of conduct may be inquired into on cross-examination if probative of truthfulness or untruthfulness. N.C.G.S. § 8C-1, Rule 608 cmt. This post examines the use of Rule 608(b) in Hamilton to determine how a prosecutor can avoid improper impeachment.