The Los Angeles Times reported late Wednesday night that federal law enforcement agents seized North Carolina Senator Richard Burr’s cellphone while serving a search warrant at Burr’s Washington, D.C., residence. The LA Times report also says that agents served a warrant on Apple in recent days to obtain information from Burr’s iCloud account. The search warrants come as an investigation intensifies into whether Burr profited off of nonpublic information about the coronavirus in the early days of the pandemic by selling significant investment holdings prior to the downturn in the stock market. On Thursday morning, Burr announced that he would step down as Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Keep reading for more news.
Probation Issues Likely to Arise as the Courts Expand Operations
As Shea discussed on Monday, the court system will look to expand operations on June 1. Today’s post describes a few of the issues related to probation that are likely to arise in the months ahead.
Demonstrating With Guns: G.S. 14-277.2
Over the past couple weeks, North Carolina has joined the growing list of states in which armed demonstrators have gathered to express their opposition to virus-related restrictions on economic activity and social gatherings, or to more generally express their opposition to any restrictions on their Second Amendment rights. Dressed in patriotic or military-style gear, and armed with a variety of openly displayed handguns, rifles, or even an (inert) AT-4 anti-tank weapon, these groups have processed along city streets and sidewalks or gathered in public locations like a historic cemetery and a downtown restaurant.
Now, particularly in light of an incident over the weekend where two local attorneys walking with their children felt threatened by a demonstrator wielding a large pipe wrench, a lot of people are asking the same question: are these armed demonstrations legal?
The question seems simple. The answer is more complicated.
Courts Will Expand Operations on June 1, But It Won’t Be Business as Usual
In regular times, North Carolina’s state courthouses are high traffic venues, filled with employees, attorneys, media, law enforcement officers, and members of the public. Much of the work that transpires in these venues takes place through in-person interactions. Litigants file pleadings and other paperwork with the clerk’s office. Attorneys meet with clients, witnesses, law enforcement officers, and victims to explain proceedings, negotiate pleas, discuss schedules, and prepare for hearings and trials. Reporters often are on-hand to report on cases, activities, and trends of interest. Some law enforcement officers appear to testify; others are there to provide security. And then there is the public. Hundreds of defendants may appear on any given criminal district court docket. Many of them are accompanied by friends or family members. Some defendants seek to have an attorney appointed; others ask for a continuance. Some plead guilty in open court, and others submit a waiver of appearance, admission of guilt, and pay fines and costs to the clerk to resolve outstanding charges. Victims also appear to observe the disposition of a criminal cases in which they were harmed. Many of these people–defendants, friends, family, and victims alike–may spend hours sitting shoulder to shoulder in a crowded courtroom before completing their business before the court.
The courthouse scene has been dramatically different and has involved significantly fewer in-person interactions in the weeks since Chief Justice Cheri Beasley entered her first COVID-19 emergency directive on March 13, 2020. While courts have remained opened, and judges have continued to hear emergency and time-sensitive matters, regular sessions of criminal court have largely ceased in most districts. Most criminal cases have been continued until June 1, 2020 or later pursuant to the Chief Justice’s directives. With June 1 just a few weeks away and with the Governor slowly easing COVID-19 restrictions, court officials are now considering how they can resume some of their previous in-court activities while ensuring the safety of everyone present in the courthouse—from employees to the public.
News Roundup
Yesterday afternoon United States Attorney Timothy Shea filed a motion to dismiss criminal charges that the Department of Justice brought against Michael Flynn, the retired Army General who briefly served as President Donald Trump’s national security advisor in early 2017, as part of the special counsel inquiry into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. The charges were based on allegations that Flynn misled FBI investigators about conversations he had with a Russian diplomat soon after the election regarding sanctions. As the New York Times reports, the motion says that the interview where Flynn misled investigators was not “conducted with a legitimate investigative basis” and, for that reason, the government would be unable to prove that Flynn’s false statements were material to an investigation. Flynn had previously pleaded guilty to the charges. Keep reading for more news.
Case Summaries — N.C. Court of Appeals (May 5, 2020)
This post summarizes opinions issued by the Court of Appeals of North Carolina on May 5, 2020.
2019 Cumulative Supplement to North Carolina Crimes Available
We’re pleased to announce that the 2019 Cumulative Supplement to North Carolina Crimes: A Guidebook on the Elements of Crime is now available for purchase. The book includes cases and legislation through December 31, 2019.
Tune in Friday for Legal Updates from the Judicial College
John Rubin, Phil Dixon and I will host Legal Updates from the Judicial College this Friday, May 8, 2020, from 1 p.m. – 2 p.m. We will discuss recent criminal law decisions by the appellate courts. Below are the details for joining this webinar.
May 1 Emergency Directives Require Continuances, Authorize Remote Proceedings, and Extend Time to Pay
Chief Justice Cheri Beasley entered an order on Friday, May 1, modifying and extending eight emergency directives previously issued on April 2 and April 16, 2020. The Chief Justice’s April 2 order, in which noted that she fully expected to extend its directives for an additional 30-day period and that judicial system stakeholders should plan for the directives to last through May, presaged the current one. Emergency orders issued by the Chief Justice pursuant to G.S. 7A-39(b)(2) initially may endure for no more than thirty days, but may be extended for additional 30-day periods. Friday’s order was effective immediately and expires on May 30, 2020.
As before, three of the emergency directives are particularly significant in criminal cases.