Many people assumed that the implementation of raise the age on December 1, 2019 meant the end of confinement of anyone under 18 in a jail. That was not the case. Even under our new legal framework for juvenile jurisdiction, some youth under 18 still have cases that are handled in criminal court from the very beginning. There is currently no legal mechanism to house these youth in a juvenile detention facility instead of a jail. This changes on August 1, 2020, when Part II of Session law 2020-83 takes effect.
News Roundup
Clashes between federal law enforcement agents and protesters in Portland, Oregon, have been major national news this week after reports emerged that, in addition to extensive use of tear gas, stun grenades, and rubber bullets, there have been instances where unidentified federal agents in unmarked vans are arresting and interrogating people and later releasing them without filing criminal charges. Details about the extent of the alleged practice are hard to come by at the time of this writing, but late last week Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum sued the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the U.S. Marshals Service, and the Federal Protective Service arguing that the agencies’ actions are unconstitutional and asking for a temporary restraining order. Keep reading for more on this story and other news.
Case Summaries – North Carolina Court of Appeals (July 21, 2020)
This post summarizes opinions issued by the Court of Appeals of North Carolina on July 21, 2020.
Fourth Circuit Confronts Issues of Race and Policing
2020 has so far seen several court opinions addressing racial discrimination in criminal cases in one way or another. A majority of the U.S. Supreme Court in Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), struck down Louisiana’s practice of allowing non-unanimous jury verdicts, pointing to the law’s racist origins (Emily Coward blogged about the decision here). In State v. Bennett, ___ N.C. ___, 843 S.E.2d 222 (June 5, 2020) and State v. Hobbs, ___ N.C. ___, 841 S.E.2d 492 (May 1, 2020), the North Carolina Supreme Court sent back Batson claims for merits hearings at the trial court (before those decisions, Emily discussed the cases in part here). In State v. Copley, 374 N.C. 224 (April 3, 2020), the N.C. Supreme Court grappled with the issue of race in closing argument (Emily also wrote about the Court of Appeals opinion in that case here). Additionally, the court recently ruled in favor of two capital defendants in the Racial Justice Act litigation. See State v. Ramseur, ___ N.C. ___, 843 S.E.2d 106 (June 5, 2020) (holding repeal of RJA was unconstitutional as an ex post facto violation and granting evidentiary hearing on the merits of claims) and State v. Burke, ___ N.C. ___, 843 S.E.2d 246 (June 5, 2020) (same).
Turning to policing, the Court of Appeals recently weighed in on civil liability and the police, with a divided panel finding excessive force claims against the officer could proceed and affirming the trial court. See Bartley v. City of High Point, ___ N.C. App. ___, ___ S.E.2d ___ (July 7, 2020). Although the case did not involve allegations of racial bias, it focused on immunity issues that are common in such cases. At the Fourth Circuit, two recent decisions directly addressed issues of race and policing. The first case involved the denial of qualified immunity for officers involved in the fatal shooting of a black suspect; the second dealt with warrantless pedestrian stops. Both cases raise interesting and relevant concerns in the conversation on racial justice and police reform. The excessive force case is Estate of Wayne A. Jones v. City of Martinsburg, 961 F.3d 661 (June 9, 2020) and the warrantless stop case is U.S. v. Curry, ___ F.3d ___, 2020 WL 3980362 (July 15, 2020) (en banc). Today’s post examines the excessive force decision.
Changes in North Carolina Jail Populations During the COVID-19 Pandemic
We previously shared data on jail occupancy in North Carolina for 2018 (here) and 2019 (here). Responding to requests for information regarding changes in jail populations during the COVID-19 pandemic, with this report we offer information about 2020 jail populations. For an explanation regarding our data source and explanatory notes, please see our prior reports. Before we get to the numbers, we make two important points. First, beginning on April 6, 2020, a moratorium was placed on most inmate transfers from county jails to the state prison system.[1] As our colleague Jamie Markham explained, state officials imposed that moratorium to help manage the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, inmates ordered to serve active time were—unless sentenced to time served, released on appeal bond, or otherwise permitted to delay the start of their sentence—rolled into a “jail backlog.”[2] By the end of May 2020, there were over 1600 backlog inmates in county jails.[3] To the extent efforts were made to reduce populations in county jails, the moratorium would have impacted those initiatives. Second, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a suspension of jury trials. Charging new offenses, however, has continued. Thus, jails may be experiencing a backlog of defendants detained pretrial.
New Emergency Directives: Facemasks Now, Jury Trials Later
The Chief Justice entered two new emergency directives last week, requiring people in court facilities to wear face coverings and directing senior resident superior court judges to craft a plan for jury trials to resume in the fall. Face coverings. Face coverings have been required in most public spaces since June 26, 2020 pursuant to … Read more
News Roundup
Last week the News Roundup noted that the U.S. Department of Justice was set to resume executions of death row inmates following a 17-year hiatus. After the Supreme Court lifted injunctions issued by lower federal court judges, two executions were carried out at a prison in Indiana this week. A third is scheduled for today. Keep reading for more on this story and other news.
Case Summaries: Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (June 2020)
This post summaries published criminal and related decisions decided by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in June, 2020.
Invitation to NC Police Departments: Apply Now for The Citation Project
On July 15th, the North Carolina Association of Chiefs of Police (NCACP) invited its members to apply to serve as pilot sites for a new project supporting evidence-based policing practices. Executed by the UNC School of Government’s Criminal Justice Innovation Lab (CJIL) and the NCACP, The Citation Project seeks to improve policing practices through implementation and rigorous evaluation of a model citation in lieu of arrest policy. The project has three components: (1) developing a model citation in lieu of arrest policy; (2) selecting North Carolina police departments to serve as pilot sites and supporting their implementation of the model policy; and (3) conducting an empirical evaluation to assess impact on core criminal justice metrics.
Resurrecting the Good Faith Exception in North Carolina?
Conventional wisdom says that unlike the federal court system, we do not have a good faith exception under North Carolina law. Even though G.S. 15A-974 was amended in 2011 and now expressly provides for a statutory good faith exception, most practitioners agree that its use remains off limits under our state constitution unless and until State v. Carter is overruled.
If you had asked me a month ago, I would have confidently said “yep, that’s the law.” Today, I’m a little less sure. Two recent Court of Appeals decisions have renewed the question of whether Carter actually says what we think it does.