A UNC School of Government Blog
The General Assembly just made it a whole lot easier to determine whether a defendant imprisoned for a misdemeanor DWI conviction will serve his or her sentence in jail or prison. Defendants sentenced to imprisonment for misdemeanor impaired driving on or after January 1, 2015 will spend that time in a local confinement facility—a jail—rather … Read more
State v. Granger, decided last week, is the latest case in which the North Carolina Court of Appeals has considered, in light of Missouri v. McNeely, __ U.S. __, 133 S.Ct. 1552 (2013), whether an exigency supported the warrantless withdrawal of an impaired driving suspect’s blood over the person’s objection. Readers may recall that the … Read more
With the amendment of Rule 702 of the North Carolina Rules of Evidence in 2011, North Carolina became a Daubert state. That change means that trial judges in this state, like their federal counterparts, serve as gatekeepers when faced with a proffer of expert testimony. See Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993) … Read more
To prove that a person drove a vehicle while under the influence of an impairing substance in violation of G.S. 20-138.1(a)(3), the State must establish that the defendant was impaired by [a]lcohol , a controlled substance under Chapter 90 of the General Statutes, some other drug or psychoactive substance capable of impairing a person’s physical … Read more
The General Assembly convened earlier today for its short session. While lawmakers’ primary focus doubtless will be the state budget, the legislature may again consider ways to address the persistent problem of impaired driving. Among the bills eligible for consideration this session is House Bill 41, which would amend the State’s license restoration laws to … Read more
The most serious level of misdemeanor DWI is Aggravated Level One, which I generally refer to as Level A1. A defendant convicted of driving while impaired is subject to sentencing at Level A1 if three or more grossly aggravating factors apply. G.S. 20-179(c). Typically, defendants sentenced at this level are repeat offenders, though it is … Read more
Courts across the country continue to wrestle with whether and how the Supreme Court’s opinion in Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. ___, 133 S. Ct. 1552 (2013), affects the lawfulness of testing carried out pursuant to a state’s implied consent laws. McNeely held, in the context of a blood draw performed over a defendant’s objection, … Read more
The Supreme Court just decided a case that significantly changes North Carolina law regarding whether a traffic stop can be made based on an anonymous 911 call alleging bad driving. The case is Navarette v. California, 572 U.S. __ (2014). The full opinion is here. This post summarizes the ruling and considers its implications for … Read more
This is not a sports story – despite what the title may suggest. Besides, I am so over March Madness. There was a little too much madness and not enough March for this double Tarheel. State v. Geisslercrain is among of yesterday’s batch of court of appeals opinions. (The court issued twenty-four published opinions yesterday—leading … Read more
The decades-old state supreme court decision in State v. Knoll, 322 N.C. 535 (1988), dismissing charges against three impaired driving defendants, is confusing. For starters, the Knoll court’s decision hinged in part on its determination that the defendants were unlawfully detained. Yet the court never even mentioned G.S. 15A-534.2—the statute authorizing the detention of impaired … Read more