North Carolina Criminal Law Blog

Prior record level calculations would be pretty straightforward—if the law never changed.

Read post

A recent case from the court of appeals answers a question we’ve been wondering about for four years: How should a person’s prior conviction for possession of drug paraphernalia (PDP) […]

Read post

I wrote a comic book about prison. Let me explain why.

Read post

Two new sentencing enhancements related to gangs will come into effect for offenses committed on or after December 1, 2017.

Read post

When determining a defendant’s prior record level for felony sentencing, prior convictions count for points according to their classification as of the offense date of the crime now being sentenced. G.S. 15A-1340.14(c). That law helps modernize a person’s record, treating it according to present-day classification standards as opposed to those that existed at the time of the prior offenses themselves. The rule can cut in either direction. If the offense class of the prior conviction has increased between the time of the prior and present offenses, the prior counts for points according to the higher offense class. If the offense class has decreased, the prior counts at its new, reduced level. The rule is simple enough to apply when an offense classification for a single crime is ratcheted up or down. What do you do, though, when a person has a prior conviction for an offense that has since been split into multiple offenses with different classifications? A recent case gives some guidance.

Read post

It’s a chilly, blustery day in Chapel Hill, but I see signs of spring. The days are getting a little longer. College basketball season kicks into high gear tonight. And there are only four days until pitchers and catchers report. But one of my favorite signs that we’ve completed another trip around the sun and are starting to tilt toward it has also arrived: the North Carolina Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission has issued its annual Statistical Report for Felonies and Misdemeanors.

Read post

Sentencing nerds rejoice. The North Carolina Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission released its annual statistical report last week. The report is available here.

Read post

Much has been written—and much of it by the Supreme Court—on the proper way to find aggravating factors for sentencing. After Apprendi v. New Jersey, Blakely v. Washington, and countless cases at the state level, it is of course clear that a defendant has a Sixth Amendment right to have aggravating factors proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. Once sentencing factors are properly found, however, responsibility shifts back to the judge to decide what to do about them. The rules for weighing factors are as loosey-goosey as the rules for finding them are rigid.

Read post

Not many sentences come from the aggravated range—four percent in Fiscal Year 2013/14, according to the North Carolina Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission. But when you use the aggravated range, you want to make sure to do it correctly. Some recent cases offer a reminder about the proper procedure for alleging and proving aggravating factors.

Read post

Last year I posted a chart summarizing the proper place of confinement (jail, prison, or Statewide Misdemeanant Confinement Program) for various types of imprisonment. The chart covers active sentences, split sentences, CRVs, quick dips, and incarceration for nonpayment of a fine. One thing it does not explicitly cover, though, is the proper place of confinement for a sentence activated upon revocation of probation. In response to a flurry of questions, I’ll take that issue up today.

Read post