Session Law 2023-114 includes many provisions that change the law governing delinquency cases. This is the first in a three-part series of blogs detailing those changes. It covers the changes to the laws that govern transfer of cases to superior court for trial as an adult and the mandate to assess mental health needs before disposition through the comprehensive clinical assessment (CCA) and care review processes. All of the S.L. 2023-114 changes described in this blog will apply to offenses committed on or after December 1, 2023.
News Roundup
On Monday, Illinois became the first state to eliminate cash bail. A provision of the state’s criminal justice reform law was supposed to eliminate the use of cash bail across the state on January 1, but was put on hold after prosecutors and sheriffs in 64 counties filed lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the law. In a 5-2 ruling in July, the Illinois Supreme Court overturned a ruling by a Kankakee County judge that the law ending cash bail was unconstitutional.
The bill does not limit its application to those newly charged with crimes. Defendants who are currently being held on cash bail are entitled to request a hearing to determine if they should be released. In fact, according to this story, a woman—who is alleged to have assaulted four Chicago police officers on Sunday—was released from custody on the day the cash bail was eliminated.
Keep reading for more criminal law news.
Case Summaries: N.C. Court of Appeals (Sept. 19, 2023)
This post summarizes the published criminal opinions from the North Carolina Court of Appeals released on September 19, 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.
Case Summaries: N.C. Court of Appeals (Sept. 12, 2023)
This post summarizes the published criminal opinions from the North Carolina Court of Appeals released on September 12, 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.
News Roundup
A convicted murderer who escaped from prison in Pennsylvania and remained on the loose for two weeks was captured this week. According to the AP, “a plane fitted with a thermal imaging camera picked up Danelo Souza Cavalcante’s heat signal, allowing teams on the ground to secure the area, surround him and move in with search dogs,” one of which latched onto the man’s leg. A different AP article notes that the officers involved in the apprehension took a photo to memorialize the moment, an act that has drawn “criticism from policing reform advocates and some members of the public.” Keep reading for more news.
State v. Calderon Refines Analysis of When Acts Support Multiple Counts of Indecent Liberties
A recent court of appeals case, State v. Calderon, ___ N.C. App. ___ (2023), sets forth a new test for determining whether multiple acts of touching a child during a single encounter can support multiple counts of indecent liberties.
More on the New Pretrial Integrity Act
Last month, my colleague Jeanette Pitts blogged about the new Pretrial Integrity Act enacted under S.L. 2023-75 (H 813). Since the bill was passed, I have gotten a few questions about potential issues that might arise once it goes into effect on October 1. This post addresses some of those concerns.
Case Summary — State v. Richardson, No. 272A14 (N.C. Sept. 1, 2023).
Presented with an appalling set of facts, the North Carolina Supreme Court unanimously upheld the defendant’s convictions for murder, kidnapping, sex offense, and felony child abuse. The majority affirmed a sentence of death. Justice Berger’s concurring opinion, addressing only a Miranda issue, was joined by four other justices, making it “the supplemental opinion of the Court.” Justice Earls dissented with regard to capital punishment, concluding the defendant was entitled to a new sentencing hearing. This post summarizes the 225-page opinion in Richardson.
Anticipatory Search Warrants: Why Must There Be Probable Cause That the Triggering Condition Will Happen?
In preparation for some upcoming teaching, I’ve been brushing up on anticipatory search warrants. Such warrants authorize a search, but only once a “triggering condition” takes place. The most common scenario involves the controlled delivery of drugs that have been intercepted in transit. The warrant authorizes the search of the destination residence, but only once the drugs have been delivered. Case law establishes that a warrant may issue only if the drugs are on a “sure course” towards delivery. This post asks why – and whether – that should be the case.