North Carolina Criminal Law Blog

I am excited to announce that I have published a bulletin on Iryna’s Law and Pretrial Release. The bill under which it was enacted, Session Law 2025-93 (HB 307), made […]

Read post

The last few years have brought about several changes to the laws surrounding pretrial release. Before many of these changes, there was a general rule that a defendant charged with […]

Read post

Last week, I posted a short blog discussing the new category of violent offenses as defined by G.S. 15A-531(9). The post includes a chart of qualifying offenses for those who […]

Read post

December 1 is approaching, which means that many of the changes enacted by the General Assembly this session will be taking effect soon. Among the pending changes are those enacted by Iryna’s law (H 307), which I covered in greater detail in an earlier blog post. This follow-up post focuses on the new category of “violent offenses.”

Read post

Last month, the General Assembly passed Session Law 2025-93 (H 307), also known as Iryna’s Law. The legislation makes a number of changes to proceedings involving pretrial release; adds a new aggravating sentencing factor; alters the way magistrates may be disciplined; and expands the permissible methods of execution, among other things. This post focuses on the changes affecting pretrial release, most of which will take effect on December 1, 2025.

Read post

The North Carolina General Assembly has been quite busy this session. This year’s legislative updates span a range of topics within the world of criminal and motor vehicle law. Summaries of those enactments will be published on the School of Government website once the General Assembly adjourns for the session. For now, I’ll use this post to highlight the laws taking effect tomorrow, October 1, 2025.

Read post

A few months ago, I blogged about the legislative changes that took effect last year surrounding the processing of defendants who are subject to immigration detainers. The North Carolina General Assembly revisited the topic this legislative session in S.L. 2025-85 (H 318). Effective October 1, 2025, the law modifies some of the provisions enacted by S.L. 2024-55 (H 10) and creates a new pretrial release procedure that requires judicial officials to determine legal residency for defendants charged with certain offenses.

Read post

When a person is arrested, a law enforcement officer must take that person before a judicial official without unnecessary delay. Subject to certain statutory exceptions, defendants charged with most noncapital offenses are entitled to pretrial release in accordance with G.S. 15A-534, which requires that at least one of five types of release be imposed before a defendant can be released. One type of release a judicial official may impose on a defendant is a “custody release,” under which a defendant is placed “in the custody of a designated person or organization agreeing to supervise him.” G.S. 15A-534(a)(3). This is the extent to which the custody release is described. The North Carolina general statutes do not provide additional guidance as to qualifications of a custodian, terms of the supervision, or penalties for improper supervision. Other states have pretrial release statutes that are identical or substantially similar to that of North Carolina, explicitly providing for pretrial release of a defendant into the custody of an individual or organization. Many of those statutes—like that of North Carolina—do not offer further guidance regarding the custodian’s supervision of the defendant. However, there are a few that offer additional detail about the parameters of the custody release. This post highlights custody release provisions in select states. While none of them is binding on this condition in our state, North Carolina judicial officials may find the information useful in crafting their local pretrial release policies.

Read post

In previous posts, I’ve addressed the expedited scheduling requirements and opportunities for permanent release of motor vehicles seized pursuant to G.S. 20-28.3. Today, I’ll address the ways a motor vehicle may be released temporarily pending trial or final disposition of the underlying offense. Generally speaking, this temporary release permits a motor vehicle owner to obtain temporary possession of the vehicle conditioned on meeting certain prerequisites and agreeing to return the motor vehicle on the day of the forfeiture hearing. Read on for more. 

Read post

In every case where a person is charged with felony speeding to elude arrest pursuant to G.S. 20-141.5(b) or (b1), the motor vehicle driven is subject to seizure and forfeiture. This is also true in DWI cases where, at the date of offense, the defendant’s driver’s license was revoked for an impaired driving revocation or the defendant did not have a valid license nor insurance. When in district court, these cases have expedited calendaring requirements (discussed here). This is in part to preserve the vehicle’s value while the case is pending. Upon seizure, the vehicle is usually first towed to a local storage facility, then transferred to the facilities of a state contractor within a few days. There are fees for towing, as well as accruing fees for storage. Whether the motor vehicle is released to its owner, a lienholder, or forfeited to the county board of education, these towing and storage fees must be paid. Often, these fees are paid out of the proceeds of the sale of the vehicle. While expediting the underlying case towards resolution is one way to minimize these fees, another is release of the vehicle before case disposition. This post addresses the circumstances under which a vehicle may be fully released pretrial and does not have to be brought back for a later forfeiture hearing.

Read post