#harnett traffic ticket

[alysongills]

2024 Affiliate Gold Mine: 15 High-Paying Programs to Join Now

Dreaming of passive income? Affiliate marketing might be your golden ticket. Let's explore 15 top-paying affiliate programs for 2024. These opportunities can turn your financial dreams into reality. We'll uncover high-commission programs that smart marketers shouldn't miss. Get ready to dive into a world of profitable partnerships and exciting possibilities. Quick Recommendation: New to Affiliate Marketing? Check out John Thornhill's Ambassador Program to learn more. Already Established? Partner with John to promote a funnel worth up to £3893 in commissions. Key Takeaways - Discover the most lucrative affiliate marketing programs in 2024 that can boost your passive income. - Learn how to leverage high-commission affiliate partnerships to drive sales and brand awareness for your business. - Explore the best affiliate networks and platforms offering top-tier monetization strategies. - Understand the benefits of promoting high-paying affiliate offers to your target audience. - Gain insights into the criteria for selecting the most profitable affiliate programs to join.

Introduction to Top Paying Affiliate Programs

Affiliate marketing offers a chance to earn passive income online. High-paying programs provide attractive commission rates and extended cookie durations. These features make them appealing to smart affiliate marketers. Why Affiliate Marketing is a Lucrative Opportunity Affiliate marketing is a great way to monetize content without selling your own products. Wirecutter.com has built a successful business by recommending products through affiliate links. This method is scalable. You can earn money by promoting companies' offerings through unique affiliate links. User clicks are tracked via cookies, allowing for commission earnings. Benefits of Promoting High-Paying Affiliate Programs - Earn attractive commissions, with some programs offering up to 30% recurring payouts on sales. - Enjoy extended cookie durations, allowing you to earn commissions for up to a year on referred customers. - Diversify your income streams and reduce reliance on a single revenue source. - Align with reputable brands and benefit from their marketing efforts and brand recognition. - Tap into a wide range of affiliate niches, from SaaS tools to personal finance and luxury travel. Finding top-paying affiliate programs in your niche can boost your earnings. These opportunities can help you grow your revenue through affiliate marketing. You can unlock new income streams and increase your earning potential. Leverage these lucrative chances to maximize your affiliate marketing success. "We value affiliate partners who truly align with our brand values and bring valuable expertise to the table." - Nancy Harnett, HubSpot

ClickFunnels: Leading Sales Funnel Builder

ClickFunnels is a powerful sales funnel and website builder. It helps businesses turn online traffic into paying customers. Over 100,000 users have created more than 10 million sales funnels with ClickFunnels. Commission Structure and Payment Methods The ClickFunnels affiliate program offers attractive recurring monthly commissions. New affiliates start at 20% commission. This rate can increase to 30% or 40% based on performance. Affiliates can earn $1 on free-plus-shipping book orders. The cookie window lasts 45 days. ClickFunnels offers various payment methods, including ACH, PayPal, and wire transfers. The payment threshold is $100. Commissions are paid between the 1st and 15th of each month. Products and Services Offered ClickFunnels provides a comprehensive suite of products and services. These help businesses build, launch, and optimize online sales funnels. Key offerings include: - Sales funnel creation and customization - Landing page builder - Membership site creation - Webinar hosting and automation - Order forms and checkout options - Analytics and split testing tools - Integrations with popular tools and services ClickFunnels caters to both seasoned marketers and new online business owners. It offers robust features to boost sales and grow your venture.

Hiscox: Small Business Insurance Affiliate Program

Hiscox leads in small business insurance. They offer tailored coverage for IT, marketing, and consulting firms. Their affiliate program lets marketers tap into this lucrative market. The Hiscox program is on CJ Affiliate network. It offers a $25 commission for each completed insurance quote. Their online quote process has a 33% conversion rate. To join, create a CJ Affiliate account and apply. You'll get promotional materials like banners and text links. The program has a seven-day cookie duration. Its three-month Earnings Per Click is $50.74. Hiscox offers incentives for top-performing affiliates. You can choose to receive earnings via check, direct deposit, or ACH. The payout process is seamless. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vF8AzDMh06U The small business insurance market is growing fast. It's expected to reach $6.4 trillion by 2025. This makes the Hiscox program a great opportunity for marketers. You can succeed by using Hiscox's brand reputation and high-converting quote process. Their robust coverage options also help in the expanding small business insurance field.

National Debt Relief: Debt Management Solutions

National Debt Relief is a top debt relief service provider. They're fully accredited with an A+ Better Business Bureau rating. They offer solutions for those struggling with unsecured credit card debt. Qualifications for Earning Commissions The National Debt Relief affiliate program lets you earn by referring clients. Your referrals need at least $10,000 in unsecured credit card debt. They must be actively seeking debt management help. They should also live in a qualifying U.S. state. Payment Options and Cookie Duration The program offers various payment options: check, direct deposit, and ACH. It has a 60-day cookie duration. This means you can earn commissions even if referrals take time to convert. Commission Structure$27.50 per qualified free debt relief quote requestCookie Duration60 daysPayment MethodsCheck, Direct Deposit, ACH Promoting the National Debt Relief affiliate program can be rewarding. You can earn while helping people achieve financial stability. The demand for debt relief services is growing. "National Debt Relief is rated as the best for customer satisfaction in the debt settlement industry."

Buildium: Property Management Software

Buildium is a top property management software that streamlines operations and attracts new clients. Their affiliate program offers commissions for promoting their solutions to real estate professionals. Since 2004, Buildium has served businesses managing rental properties in over 50 countries. They cater to companies handling 5,000+ properties, including residential, commercial, and student housing. You can earn a $10 commission for each qualified lead, like demo requests or free trial sign-ups. Additionally, you'll receive 25% commission for every monthly subscription referral. Buildium offers three pricing plans: Essential at $99/month, Growth at $174/month, and Premium at $375/month. Higher-tier plans include features like property inspections, eSignatures, and priority support. PlanPriceFree AccountsTransaction FeesEssential$99/month5$1.25 per incoming EFT, $0.50 per outgoing EFT, 2.99% per credit cardGrowth$174/month15Reduced or waived feesPremium$375/month15Reduced or waived fees Electronic payments are processed in 1-2 business days, ensuring efficient rent collection. However, a 2020 security breach at Buildium's parent company highlights the need for robust security measures. The Buildium affiliate program is a great opportunity for promoting lead generation in property management. You can help real estate pros improve operations while earning commissions.

Top paying affiliate programs in 2023

Choosing the right high-paying affiliate programs is key to boosting your earnings. Top programs in 2023 offer competitive commissions, long cookie durations, and reliable payments. Partnering with leading brands can increase your credibility and improve user experience. Criteria for Selecting High-Paying Programs Consider these important factors when evaluating affiliate programs: - Commission Rates: Seek programs offering 1% to 50% or more, based on product type and your sales ability. - Cookie Durations: Focus on programs with 30-day or longer tracking windows to capture more sales. - Payment Methods: Choose programs with flexible options like bank transfers, e-wallets, or checks. - Brand Reputation: Team up with respected industry leaders to boost your credibility and audience satisfaction. Overview of Commission Rates and Cookie Durations Affiliate ProgramCommission RateCookie DurationCloudwaysUp to $125 per sale plus 7% lifetime commission90 daysShopifyUp to $150 per sale for full-priced plan referrals30 daysAmazon Associates1% to 20% depending on product type24 hoursLeadpagesUp to 50% recurring commissions30 daysConvertKit30% monthly recurring commission for 24 months30 days Pick top-paying affiliate programs that match your audience and promotional skills. This approach will help you maximize earnings and build a lasting affiliate marketing strategy in 2023.

Sendinblue: Email Marketing Automation Platform

Sendinblue is a top choice for email marketing software affiliates. It helps small and medium businesses automate their email campaigns. The platform offers powerful features for streamlining marketing efforts. Commission Structure for Free and Paid Accounts Sendinblue's affiliate program rewards both free and paid account referrals. You'll earn €5 for each new free account sign-up. For upgrades to paid subscriptions, you'll receive a hefty €100 commission. The program uses Tapfiliate for tracking leads and sales. You can monitor your earnings in real-time. Sendinblue offers a 90-day cookie window and flexible payment options. To start earning, you need to refer one paid subscription. After that, you're automatically validated for the Sendinblue affiliate program. Sendinblue's email marketing software includes marketing automation and SMS campaigns. It also offers social media integration. The commission structure provides a great opportunity to earn from this leading platform. Quick Recommendation: New to Affiliate Marketing? Check out John Thornhill's Ambassador Program to learn more. Already Established? Partner with John to promote a funnel worth up to £3893 in commissions.

Semrush: Comprehensive Digital Marketing Suite

Semrush is a top-notch Semrush affiliate program. It offers a wide range of digital marketing tools on one platform. Users can handle competitor research, content marketing, SEO, PPC, and social media marketing efficiently. Semrush plans start at $99.95 per year. It's affordable for businesses of all sizes. The program is on the Impact Radius network. It offers $0.01 for new account registrations and $10 for free trial sign-ups. The cookie window is 120 days for registrations. For trials, it extends to 370 days. This gives you plenty of time to convert leads. Semrush provides marketing assets to boost your affiliate earnings. These include custom banners and landing pages. You can get paid via PayPal or wire transfer. The minimum payout is $50 for PayPal and $1,000 for wire transfers. Payments are automatic on the 10th and 25th of each month. Commission StructurePayment ThresholdsCookie Duration$0.01 per new account registration $10 per free trial sign-up$50 for PayPal $1,000 for wire transfer120 days on registrations 370 days on trials Semrush offers powerful digital marketing tools and great affiliate earnings potential. It's an excellent choice for marketers looking to grow their income.

CIT Bank: Consumer and Business Banking Products

CIT Bank, a First Citizens BancShares subsidiary, is a top 20 U.S. financial institution. It boasts over $100 billion in assets. The bank offers various banking products for consumers and small-to-medium businesses. CIT Bank has affiliate programs on CJ Affiliate and FlexOffers networks. Both have a 30-day cookie window. However, the commission structure differs between these programs. Commission Rates for Different Account Types The CIT Bank affiliate program offers these commission rates: Account TypeCommission RatePersonal Checking$25 per qualified accountSavings Accounts$10 per qualified accountMoney Market Accounts$15 per qualified accountCDs$20 per qualified accountSmall Business Checking$30 per qualified accountBusiness Savings$15 per qualified account Grasping the CIT Bank affiliate program and its commission structure is key. This knowledge helps you promote banking products effectively. You can earn competitive commissions for your referrals.

Personal Capital: Wealth Management Tools

The Personal Capital affiliate program offers a lucrative opportunity for affiliate marketers. This wealth management platform provides powerful tools for financial planning and investment growth. Users can plan their financial future and grow investments with Personal Capital's tools. The platform stands out as a leading option in the wealth management industry. Requirements for Qualified Leads To earn commissions, you need to drive qualified leads to Personal Capital. These are users who sign up for the free financial dashboard. Qualified leads must link at least $100,000 in portable assets. Personal Capital pays $100 for each qualified lead you refer. Promote Personal Capital's wealth management tools to your audience. Focus on features that attract high-value users. - Automated portfolio management - Personalized investment advice - Retirement planning tools - Budgeting and cash flow analysis Position Personal Capital as a valuable solution for wealth growth and management. This approach can help attract qualified leads and earn substantial commissions. "Personal Capital's affiliate program is a true game-changer, offering $100 per qualified lead. It's a must-have in any serious affiliate marketer's arsenal." Success in this program comes from focusing on quality over quantity. The high bar for qualified leads offers great potential rewards. Aim for users who can benefit from Personal Capital's comprehensive wealth management tools. Your efforts can lead to significant earnings through this program.

Maximizing Earnings with Top Affiliate Programs

Effective strategies are key to unlocking the potential of high-paying affiliate programs. Create compelling content that showcases product benefits. Use email marketing to nurture leads and keep your audience engaged. Harness social media to reach a wider audience. Showcase the value of your affiliate partnerships. Monitor your performance to identify top-performing offers and marketing channels. Test and refine your strategies regularly. This helps optimize your affiliate promotions for maximum impact and profitability. Strategies for Promoting High-Paying Offers - Craft engaging content that showcases the benefits of your affiliate products - Leverage email marketing to nurture leads and keep your audience informed - Leverage social media to reach a wider audience and promote your affiliate partnerships Tracking and Optimizing Affiliate Marketing Efforts - Monitor key metrics such as click-through rates, conversion rates, and earnings per click - Identify your highest-performing offers and marketing channels - Continuously test and refine your strategies to optimize for maximum profitability Implement these strategies and maintain a data-driven approach to your affiliate marketing efforts. This unlocks the full potential of top-paying programs. Stay agile and adapt to market trends. Continually optimize your approach for lasting success in affiliate marketing. Keep evolving your strategies to meet your audience's changing needs. Quick Recommendation: New to Affiliate Marketing? Check out John Thornhill's Ambassador Program to learn more. Already Established? Partner with John to promote a funnel worth up to £3893 in commissions.

Conclusion

Affiliate marketing offers vast opportunities for publishers and marketers to generate passive income. By choosing top-paying programs in your niche, you can unlock massive earning potential. These programs provide tools to help you maximize earnings and thrive in the digital landscape. Eight out of ten brands now offer affiliate marketing programs. Over 31% of publishers say it's their primary income source. Platforms like Lemonads connect you with high-converting offers and recurring revenue streams. You can promote various high-paying programs. Yelp offers $100 for small business ad placements. Wix pays $100 per sale. SocialPilot, Shopify, LiveChat, HubSpot, and BigCommerce offer recurring commissions. The key is to match your content and audience with the best programs. Master affiliate marketing to turn your online presence into a passive income machine.

#image_title

FAQ

What is the affiliate marketing industry worth? The affiliate marketing industry is valued at .2 billion. It offers numerous opportunities for online income generation. This growing field continues to attract entrepreneurs and marketers alike. What is a pay per lead (PPL) affiliate program? PPL affiliate programs reward commissions for qualified lead referrals. Unlike traditional models, you earn without closing sales. This approach simplifies the earning process for affiliates. What are the key features of the ClickFunnels affiliate program? ClickFunnels offers

FAQ

What is the affiliate marketing industry worth? The affiliate marketing industry is valued at $8.2 billion. Read the full article

[trafficticketskissling]

Will Defects on Face of Ticket get you a Dismissal

www.kisslinglaw.com

In a lot of states, you can get a traffic ticket dismissed is there are any mistakes on the face of the ticket.  No so in North Carolina.  Here is a great article from the NC School of Government on the issue.

Last year, the court of appeals ruled that a citation that failed to allege an essential element of an offense was sufficient to serve as the State’s pleading. The court concluded that “the standard for issuance of an indictment [which must allege every essential element of an offense to be valid] is not precisely the same as [for] a citation,” and under the more relaxed standard, the citation adequately identified the offense even though it failed to allege an essential element. State v. Allen, __ N.C. App. __, 783 S.E.2d 799 (2016) (an officer cited a motorist for an open container violation, but failed to allege that the container was in the passenger compartment of the defendant’s vehicle; more information about Allen is here).

Last week, a divided panel of the same court ruled that a citation that failed to allege multiple elements of an offense was sufficient. The new opinion raises questions about just how low the bar is for citations, and perhaps for other district court pleadings as well.

The new case is State v. Jones.

Facts. The case began when a Raleigh officer stopped a vehicle for speeding. The driver wasn’t impaired, but did have an open can of cold beer in the car. The officer issued a citation that read in part as follows:

The officer named below has probable cause to believe that on or about Sunday, the 04 day of January, 2015 at 10:16PM in [Wake] [C]ounty . . . [Defendant] did unlawfully and willfully OPERATE A MOTOR VEHICLE ON A STREET OR HIGHWAY AT A SPEED OF 62 MPH IN A 45 MPH ZONE. (G.S. 20-141(J1)

and on or about Sunday, the 04 day of January, 2015 at 10:16PM in [Wake] [C]ounty . . . [Defendant] did unlawfully and willfully WITH AN OPEN CONTAINER OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE AFTER DRINKING. (G.S. 20-138.7(A))[.]

Procedural history. The defendant was convicted on both counts in district court and appealed for trial de novo in superior court. A jury acquitted him of speeding but convicted him of the open container violation. He appealed again to the appellate division, arguing that the charging language for the open container charge was defective. He contended that the language omits (1) any allegation that he drove or operated a motor vehicle on a public street or highway, and (2) any allegation that the open container was in the passenger area of his vehicle.

Majority opinion. Judge Berger, joined by Judge Dillon, concluded that the citation was sufficient. The majority reasoned that a citation must only “[i]dentify the crime charged,” G.S. 15A-302(c); that the official commentary to article 49 of chapter 15A of the General Statutes states that this is “less than is required” for other forms of criminal process, because a citation “will be prepared by an officer on the scene”; and that a defendant who wants a more technical statement of the offense has a right to object to trial on a citation and thereby to require the State to file a statement of charges or to obtain a summons or an arrest warrant, G.S. 15A-922(c).

Applying these principles to the citation at issue, the majority stated:

The citation properly identified the crime of having an open container of alcohol in the car while alcohol remained in [the defendant’s] system . . . by citing [G.S.] 20-138.7(a) and stating Defendant had an open container of alcohol after drinking. Identifying a crime charged does not require a hyper-technical assertion of each element of an offense.

Dissent. Judge Zachary dissented. In her view, (1) a citation is a criminal pleading, G.S. 15A-921; (2) a pleading must “asserts facts supporting every element of a criminal offense,” G.S. 15A-924(a)(5); and (3) the citation at issue failed to allege multiple essential elements and so was fatally defective. As to the majority’s conclusion that the citations are held to a lower standard than other charging documents, Judge Zachary contended that the relaxed standard applies to the use of a citation as a criminal process that requires the defendant to come to court, but not to the use of a citation as a criminal pleading that formally charges the defendant with an offense.

Analysis. Both the majority opinion and the dissent in Jones are thoughtful and detailed. Given the dissent, I would be surprised if the defendant did not exercise his right to have the state supreme court review the matter.

If there is no further appeal, or if Jones is affirmed, two principal questions will arise:

Just how low is the bar for citations? When does charging language fail to “identify” the offense charged? The majority in Jones seemed to rely in part on the fact that the correct statutory citation accompanied the charging language. Will the inclusion of a correct statutory citation cure any and all defects with a citation? Could a statutory citation be sufficient by itself to identify an offense, even without any charging text?

Is there any impact on other district court pleadings? Most of the reasoning in Jones is specific to citations. Only citations are prepared by an officer in the field and a defendant’s right to object to being tried on a citation does not extend to other types of pleadings. But the last several pages of the majority opinion explores what seems to be an alternative holding that even if the citation were defective, “the [citation’s] failure to comply with [G.S.] 15A-924(a)(5) by neglecting to allege facts supporting every element of an offense in a citation is not a jurisdictional defect” that may be raised at any time.  The majority’s argument seems to be that while a proper indictment is required for the superior court to have jurisdiction over a felony, district court matters do not have the same jurisdictional prerequisite. Candidly, I am not sure that I fully grasp this section of the opinion, but the court appears to be drawing a distinction between misdemeanors and felonies, not between citations and other pleadings. Therefore, its reasoning may apply to other district court pleadings, and may impact the remedy available when pleading defects are identified.

I didn’t quickly find numerous cases from other states addressing similar issues, but I did find one. In State v. Leach, 782 P.2d 552 (Wash. 1989) (en banc), the Supreme Court of Washington held that while most criminal charging documents must allege every element of a charged offense, citations need not do so as long as they describe the offense generally and provide a citation to the pertinent statute. As did the majority in Jones, the court emphasized that citations are normally prepared at the scene by law enforcement officers.

[candy--heart]

An investigation into irregular traffic tickets issued in Harnett County has resulted in one State Highway Patrol (SHP) trooper losing his job.

(via 1 trooper loses job after Highway Patrol investigates ticket padding complaints [Video])

[marymosley]

News Roundup

The major national criminal law news of the week was the arrest of Jeffrey Epstein on federal sex-trafficking charges involving underage girls.  Epstein, who often is referred to as a billionaire financier though the extent and source of his wealth is largely shrouded in mystery, pleaded guilty in 2008 to prostitution charges in Florida state court as part of an unusually lenient plea agreement that allowed him to avoid serious federal sex crime charges and shielded any of his co-conspirators from prosecution.  That plea agreement was approved by current Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta, who was the United States Attorney in the Southern District of Florida at the time.  Over the years, Epstein has been connected to President Donald Trump and former President Bill Clinton.  Keep reading for more news.

Ticket Irregularities.  WNCN reports that two North Carolina State Highway Patrol troopers are under investigation for “traffic ticket irregularities” in Harnett County, and that one of the troopers involved has been “separated” from the Highway Patrol.  The report says that investigators are looking into whether the troopers wrote citations without actually serving them on the person who was being cited, meaning that the person would be unaware of the charges until he or she went to court or tried to pay their fine.  Jason R. Benson was separated from the Highway Patrol and Christopher S. Carter is on administrative duty during the ongoing investigation.

Officer Shot.  WRAL reports that multiple law enforcement agencies are investigating the non-fatal shooting of a Henderson police officer early yesterday morning.  The officer, who had not been publicly identified at the time of writing, was investigating a shooting that occurred around 9pm Wednesday evening.  While interviewing possible witnesses around midnight, the officer was hit by a bullet fired from a passing car.  Anyone with information about the incident should contact the Henderson police department.

Peeping Tom.  Another report from WRAL says that Raleigh police are asking for the public’s help in identifying a man who has been caught on security cameras in the Falls River neighborhood sneaking around houses and exposing himself.  Images of the suspect and contact information for police can be found at the WRAL link.

Coach Charged.  The Greensboro News & Record reports that the recently-hired boys basketball coach at Southwest Guilford High School has been charged with taking indecent liberties with a student at North Davidson High School, his previous employer.  James Brandon Mullis was arrested on the charge last week, and Southwest Guilford said that his contract would not be renewed for the upcoming school year.

General Accused of Sexual Misconduct.  The Associated Press reports that the nomination of General John Hyten to be the next vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is in jeopardy following allegations that he subjected a senior military officer to a series of unwanted sexual advances.  The officer told the Associated Press that Hyten kissed, hugged, and rubbed himself against her in 2017 while she was one of his aides.  The officer also said that he tried to derail her career after she rebuffed him.  An Air Force investigation conducted after the officer reported the conduct did not reveal sufficient evidence to recommend any administrative punishment for Hyten or charge him with a crime.

Illegal Beer.  A Utah beer company has been stalled in its efforts to sell “Polygamy Porter” in North Carolina according to the Fayetteville Observer.  In a letter to the Utah Brewers Cooperative, the North Carolina Alcoholic Beverage Commission said that it refused to approve the beer for sale because “[p]olygamy is illegal.”  A quick review of the General Statutes suggests that changing the name to “Non-Disruptive Public Intoxication Porter” could be a viable alternative.

The post News Roundup appeared first on North Carolina Criminal Law.

News Roundup published first on https://immigrationlawyerto.tumblr.com/

[trafficticketskissling]

HABITUAL DWI CAN GET LICENSE

www.kisslinglaw.com

New legislation on Habitual DWI and comments from Shea Denning at the NC SOG.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA

SESSION 2017

SESSION LAW 2017-176

SENATE BILL 384

AN ACT to AMEND THE LAW REGARDING THE USE OF MOTIONS FOR APPROPRIATE RELIEF; to clarify the definition of "felony offense" for purposes of the habitual felon law and to remove the sunset on drivers license eligibility for persons convicted of habitual impaired driving; to include breaking and entering with the intent to terrorize as a habitual breaking and entering status offense; to clarify that when a person is charged with an offense which requires mandatory fingerprinting, fingerprinting will be ordered by the court if the offender was not arrested and fingerprinted at the time of the offense; to provide that a private citizen's showing of probable cause to the magistrate shall include sufficient information supported by oath OR AFFIRMATION that a crime has occurred and shall issue as a summons unless a substantial LIKELIHOOD exists that the defendant will not RESPOND to a SUMMONS; AND TO AMEND THE SHERIFF'S SUPPLEMENTAL PENSION FUND.

The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:

PART I. MOTIONS FOR APPROPRIATE RELIEF

SECTION 1.(a)  G.S. 15A‑1413(d) reads as rewritten:

"(d)      All motions for appropriate relief filed in superior court shall, when filed, be referred to the senior resident superior court judge, who shall assign the motion as provided by this section for review and administrative action, including, as may be appropriate, dismissal, calendaring for hearing, entry of a scheduling order for subsequent events in the case, including disclosure of expert witness information described in G.S. 15A‑903(a)(2) and G.S. 15A‑905(c)(2) for expert witnesses reasonably expected to be called at a hearing on the motion, or other appropriate actions.

All motions for appropriate relief filed in district court shall, when filed, be referred to the chief district court judge, who shall assign the motion as provided by this section for review and administrative action, including, as may be appropriate, dismissal, calendaring for hearing, entry of a scheduling order for subsequent events in the case, or other appropriate actions."

SECTION 1.(b)  G.S. 15A‑1420(b1) reads as rewritten:

"§ 15A‑1420.  Motion for appropriate relief; procedure.

…

(b1)      Filing Motion With Clerk. –

(1)        The proceeding shall be commenced by filing with the clerk of superior court of the district wherein the defendant was indicted a motion, with service on the district attorney in noncapital cases, and service on both the district attorney and Attorney General in capital cases.

(2)        The clerk, upon receipt of the motion, shall place the motion on the criminal docket. When a motion is placed on the criminal docket, the clerk shall promptly bring the motion, or a copy of the motion, to the attention of the senior resident superior court judge or chief district court judge, as appropriate, for assignment to the appropriate judge pursuant to G.S. 15A‑1413.

(3)        The judge assigned to the motion shall conduct an initial review of the motion. If the judge determines that all of the claims alleged in the motion are frivolous, the judge shall deny the motion. If the motion presents sufficient information to warrant a hearing or the interests of justice so require, the judge shall appoint counsel for an indigent defendant who is not represented by counsel. Counsel so appointed shall review the motion filed by the petitioner and either adopt the motion or file an amended motion. After postconviction counsel files an initial or amended motion, or a determination is made that the petitioner is proceeding without counsel, the judge may direct the State to file an answer. Should the State contend that as a matter of law the defendant is not entitled to the relief sought, the State may request leave to file a limited answer so alleging."

SECTION 1.(c)  G.S. 7A‑451(a) reads as rewritten:

"§ 7A‑451.  Scope of entitlement.

(a)        An indigent person is entitled to services of counsel in the following actions and proceedings:

(1)        Any case in which imprisonment, or a fine of five hundred dollars ($500.00), or more, is likely to be adjudged;adjudged.

(2)        A hearing on a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under Chapter 17 of the General Statutes;Statutes.

(3)        A motion for appropriate relief under Chapter 15A of the General Statutes if appointment of counsel is authorized by Chapter 15A of the General Statutes and the defendant has been convicted of a felony, has been fined five hundred dollars ($500.00) or more, or has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment;imprisonment.

(4)        A hearing for revocation of probation;probation.

(5)        A hearing in which extradition to another state is sought;sought.

(6)        A proceeding for an inpatient involuntary commitment to a facility under Part 7 of Article 5 of Chapter 122C of the General Statutes, or a proceeding for commitment under Part 8 of Article 5 of Chapter 122C of the General Statutes.

(7)        In any case of execution against the person under Chapter 1, Article 28 of the General Statutes, and in any civil arrest and bail proceeding under Chapter 1, Article 34, of the General Statutes;Statutes.

(8)        In the case of a juvenile, a hearing as a result of which commitment to an institution or transfer to the superior court for trial on a felony charge is possible;possible.

(9)        A hearing for revocation of parole at which the right to counsel is provided in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 148, Article 4, of the General Statutes;Statutes.

(10)      Repealed by Session Laws 2003, c. 13, s. 2(a), effective April 17, 2003, and applicable to all petitions for sterilization pending and orders authorizing sterilization that have not been executed as of April 17, 2003.

(11)      A proceeding for the provision of protective services according to Chapter 108A, Article 6 of the General Statutes;Statutes.

(12)      In the case of a juvenile alleged to be abused, neglected, or dependent under Subchapter I of Chapter 7B of the General Statutes;Statutes.

(13)      A proceeding to find a person incompetent under Subchapter I of Chapter 35A, of the General Statutes;Statutes.

(14)      A proceeding to terminate parental rights where a guardian ad litem is appointed pursuant to G.S. 7B‑1101;G.S. 7B‑1101.

(15)      An action brought pursuant to Article 11 of Chapter 7B of the General Statutes to terminate an indigent person's parental rights.

(16)      A proceeding involving consent for an abortion on an unemancipated minor pursuant to Article 1A, Part 2 of Chapter 90 of the General Statutes. G.S. 7A‑450.1, 7A‑450.2, and 7A‑450.3 shall not apply to this proceeding.

(17)      A proceeding involving limitation on freedom of movement or access pursuant to G.S. 130A‑475 or G.S. 130A‑145.

(18)      A proceeding involving placement into satellite monitoring under Part 5 of Article 27A of Chapter 14 of the General Statutes."

SECTION 1.(d)  This section becomes effective December 1, 2017, and applies to motions for appropriate relief filed on or after that date.

PART II. HABITUAL FELONS/CLARIFY PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS

SECTION 2.(a)  G.S. 14‑7.1 reads as rewritten:

"§ 14‑7.1.  Persons defined as habitual felons.

(a)        Any person who has been convicted of or pled guilty to three felony offenses in any federal court or state court in the United States or combination thereof is declared to be an habitual felon and may be charged as a status offender pursuant to this Article.

(b)        For the purpose of this Article, a felony offense is defined as an to include all of the following:

(1)        An offense which that is a felony under the laws of the State or other sovereign wherein a this State.

(2)        An offense that is a felony under the laws of another state or sovereign that is substantially similar to an offense that is a felony in North Carolina, and to which a plea of guilty was entered, or a conviction was returned regardless of the sentence actually imposed.

(3)        An offense that is a crime under the laws of another state or sovereign that does not classify any crimes as felonies if all of the following apply:

a.         The offense is substantially similar to an offense that is a felony in North Carolina.

b.         The offense may be punishable by imprisonment for more than a year in state prison.

c.         A plea of guilty was entered or a conviction was returned regardless of the sentence actually imposed.

(4)        An offense that is a felony under federal law. Provided, however, that federal offenses relating to the manufacture, possession, sale and kindred offenses involving intoxicating liquors shall not be considered felonies for the purposes of this Article.

(c)        For the purposes of this Article, felonies committed before a person attains the age of 18 years shall not constitute more than one felony. The commission of a second felony shall not fall within the purview of this Article unless it is committed after the conviction of or plea of guilty to the first felony. The commission of a third felony shall not fall within the purview of this Article unless it is committed after the conviction of or plea of guilty to the second felony. Pleas of guilty to or convictions of felony offenses prior to July 6, 1967, shall not be felony offenses within the meaning of this Article. Any felony offense to which a pardon has been extended shall not for the purpose of this Article constitute a felony. The burden of proving such pardon shall rest with the defendant and the State shall not be required to disprove a pardon."

SECTION 2.(b)  Section 7 of S.L. 2009‑369, as amended by Section 61.5 of S.L. 2014‑115, reads as rewritten:

"SECTION 7.  This act becomes effective December 1, 2009, and applies to applications for reinstatement that occur on or after that date. This act expires December 1, 2016."

SECTION 2.(c)  Subsection (a) of this section becomes effective December 1, 2017, and applies to any offense committed on or after that date and that is the principal felony offense for a charge of a status offense of habitual felon. Subsection (b) of this section is retroactively effective December 1, 2016. The remainder of this section is effective when it becomes law. Prosecutions for offenses committed before the effective date of this section are not abated or affected by this section, and the statutes that would be applicable but for this section remain applicable to those prosecutions.

PART III. INCLUDE BREAKING AND ENTERING WITH INTENT TO TERRORIZE IN HABITUAL BREAKING AND ENTERING

SECTION 3.(a)  G.S. 14‑7.25 reads as rewritten:

"§ 14‑7.25.  Definitions.

The following definitions apply in this Article:

(1)        "Breaking and entering." – The term means any of the following felony offenses:

a.         First degree burglary (G.S. 14‑51).

b.         Second degree burglary (G.S. 14‑51).

c.         Breaking out of dwelling house burglary (G.S. 14‑53).

d.         Breaking or entering buildings generally (G.S. 14‑54(a)).

d1.       Breaking or entering with intent to terrorize or injure an occupant of the building (G.S. 14‑54(a1)).

e.         Breaking or entering a building that is a place of religious worship (G.S. 14‑54.1).

f.          Any repealed or superseded offense substantially equivalent to any of the offenses in sub‑subdivision a., b., c., d., or e. of this subdivision.

g.         Any offense committed in another jurisdiction substantially similar to any of the offenses in sub‑subdivision a., b., c., d., or e. of this subdivision.

(2)        "Convicted." – The person has been adjudged guilty of or has entered a plea of guilty or no contest to the offense of breaking and entering.

(3)        "Status offender." – A person who is a habitual breaking and entering status offender as described in G.S. 14‑7.26."

SECTION 3.(b)  This section becomes effective December 1, 2017, and applies to offenses committed on or after that date.

PART IV. FINGERPRINTING UPON ARREST

SECTION 4.(a)  G.S. 15A‑502 is amended by adding a new subsection to read:

"§ 15A‑502.  Photographs and fingerprints.

…

(e)        Fingerprints or photographs taken pursuant to subsection (a), (a1), or (a2) of this section may be forwarded to the State Bureau of Investigation, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, or other law‑enforcement agencies.

(f)        If a person is charged with an offense for which fingerprints are required pursuant to this section but the person is not arrested for that offense, the court before which the charge is pending shall order the defendant to submit to fingerprinting by the Sheriff or other appropriate law enforcement agency at the earliest practical opportunity. If the person fails to appear for fingerprinting as ordered by the court, the sheriff shall so inform the court, and the court may initiate proceedings for criminal contempt against the person pursuant to G.S. 5A‑15, including issue of an order for arrest pursuant to G.S. 5A‑16, if necessary. The defendant shall continue to be subject to the court's order to provide fingerprints until submitted."

SECTION 4.(b)  This section becomes effective December 1, 2017.

PART V. CITIZEN'S WARRANTS

SECTION 5.(a)  G.S. 15A‑304(b) reads as rewritten:

"(b)      When Issued. – A warrant for arrest may be issued, instead of or subsequent to a criminal summons, when it appears to the judicial official that the person named should be taken into custody. Circumstances to be considered in determining whether the person should be taken into custody may include, but are not limited to, failure to appear when previously summoned, facts making it apparent that a person summoned will fail to appear, danger that the person accused will escape, danger that there may be injury to person or property, or the seriousness of the offense.

(1)        Upon a finding of probable cause pursuant to subsection (d) of this section, the issuing official shall issue a criminal summons instead of a warrant, unless the official finds that the accused should be taken into custody. Circumstances to be considered in determining whether the accused should be taken into custody may include, but are not limited to, any of the following:

a.         The accused has a history of failure to appear before the court as required, or there is other evidence that the person is unlikely to appear in response to a summons for the current proceeding.

b.         There is evidence that the accused is likely to escape or otherwise flee the State in order to avoid prosecution for the offense alleged.

c.         There is evidence of imminent danger of harm to persons or property if the accused is not taken into custody.

d.         The location of the accused is not readily discoverable, such that a criminal summons would be unlikely to be served before any court date assigned at the time of issue.

e.         A relevant statute provides that arrest is mandatory for an offense charged.

f.          The seriousness of the offense. However, the fact that the offense charged is a felony shall not, by itself, constitute grounds for the issuance of a warrant.

(2)        Notwithstanding subsection (d) of this section, an official shall only find probable cause based solely on information provided by a person who is not a sworn law enforcement officer if the information is provided by written affidavit. If the finding of probable cause pursuant to subsection (d) of this section is based solely upon the written affidavit of a person who is not a sworn law enforcement officer, the issuing official shall not issue a warrant for arrest and instead shall issue a criminal summons, unless one of the following circumstances exists:

a.         There is corroborating testimony of the facts establishing probable cause from a sworn law enforcement officer or at least one disinterested witness.

b.         The official finds that obtaining investigation of the alleged offense by a law enforcement agency would constitute a substantial burden for the complainant.

c.         The official finds substantial evidence of one or more of the grounds listed in subdivision (1) of this subsection."

SECTION 5.(b)  This section becomes effective December 1, 2017, and applies to warrants issued on or after that date.

PART VI. SHERIFFS' SUPPLEMENTAL PENSION FUND CHANGES

SECTION 6.(a)  G.S. 143‑166.82 reads as rewritten:

"§ 143‑166.82.  Assets.

(a)        On and after July 1, 1985, each Clerk of Superior Court shall remit to the Department of Justice the monthly receipts collected pursuant to G.S. 7A‑304 (a)(3a) to be deposited to the credit of the Sheriffs' Supplemental Pension Fund, hereinafter referred to as the Fund, to be used in making monthly pension payments to eligible retired sheriffs under the provisions of this Article and to pay the cost of administering the provisions of this Article.

(a1)      The Department of Justice shall, at the beginning of each calendar year, calculate the amount of funds, in addition to those funds from subsection (a) of this section and from G.S. 143‑166.83(f), needed for that year to pay the pension benefits under this Article and shall bill each county for that amount on a pro rata basis based on the most recent population estimates by the Office of State Budget and Management for each county. The amount so billed shall be paid by each county no later than March 1st of that year to the Department of Justice and shall be deposited into the Fund. For funding this contribution to the Fund, counties may use the portion of the civil process service fee per G.S. 7A‑311(a)(1) that is not required by statute to be used to ensure the timely service of process within the county, may use other funds, or both.

(b)        The State Treasurer shall be the custodian of the Sheriffs' Supplemental Pension Fund and shall invest its assets in accordance with the provisions of G.S. 147‑69.2 and G.S. 147‑69.3."

SECTION 6.(b)  G.S. 143‑166.83 reads as rewritten:

"§ 143‑166.83. Disbursements.

(a)        Repealed by Session Laws 1991 (Reg. Sess., 1992), c. 900, s. 54, effective January 1, 1993.

(b)        Immediately following January 1, 1993, and the first of January of each succeeding calendar year thereafter, the Department of Justice shall divide an amount equal to ninety percent (90%) of the assets of the Fund at the end of the preceding calendar year and shall add to that amount any assets remaining pursuant to subsection (f) of this section and the amounts pursuant to G.S. 143‑166.82(a1) and disburse the same as monthly payments in accordance with the provisions of this Article.

(c)        Ten percent (10%) of the Fund's assets as of January 1, 1993, and at the beginning of each calendar year thereafter, may be used by the Department of Justice in administering the provisions of this Article. This ten percent (10%) is to be derived from the Fund's assets prior to the addition of assets remaining pursuant to subsection (f) of this section.

(d)       All the Fund's disbursements shall be conducted in the same manner as disbursements are conducted for other special funds of the State.

(e)        If, for any reason, the Fund shall be insufficient to pay any pension benefits owed under this Article or other charges, then all benefits or payments shall be reduced pro rata for as long as the deficiency in amount exists. No claim shall accrue with respect to any amount by which a pension payment shall have been reduced.

(f)        Any assets remaining after reserving an amount equal to the disbursements required under subsections (b) and (c) of this section shall be accrued and included in disbursements for pensioners in succeeding years."

SECTION 6.(c)  G.S. 143‑166.85 reads as rewritten:

"§ 143‑166.85.  Benefits.

(a)        An eligible retired sheriff shall be entitled to and receive an annual pension benefit, payable in equal monthly installments, equal to one share for each full year of eligible service as sheriff multiplied by his total number of years of eligible service. The amount of each share shall be determined by dividing the total number of years of eligible service for all eligible retired sheriffs on December 31 of each calendar year into the amount to be disbursed as monthly pension payments in accordance with the provisions of G.S. 143‑166.83(b). In no event however shall a monthly pension under this Article exceed an amount, which an amount that, when added to a retired allowance at retirement from the Local Governmental Employees' Retirement System or to the amount he would have been eligible to receive if service had not been forfeited by the withdrawal of accumulated contributions, is greater than equal to seventy‑five percent (75%) of a sheriff's equivalent annual salary immediately preceding retirement computed on the latest monthly base rate, to a maximum amount that does not exceed (i) of one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500).($1,500) or (ii) the sheriff's equivalent annual salary immediately preceding retirement computed on the latest monthly base rate when the benefit described in this subsection is added to the amount of the benefit the sheriff receives under G.S. 143‑166.42 and the amount of the sheriff's retired allowance at retirement from the Local Governmental Employees' Retirement System or the amount the sheriff would have been eligible to receive if service had not been forfeited by the withdrawal of accumulated contributions.

(b)        All monthly pensions payable under this Article shall be paid on the last business day of each month.

(c)        At the death of the pensioner, benefits for the current calendar year will continue and be paid in monthly installments to the decedent's spouse or estate, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 28A of the General Statutes. Benefits will cease upon the last payment being made in December of the current year.

(d)       Monthly pensions payable under this Article will cease upon the full‑time reemployment of a pensioner with an employer participating in the Local Governmental Employees' Retirement System for as long as the pensioner is so reemployed.

(e)        Repealed by Session Laws 1989, c. 792, s. 2.9.

(f)        Nothing contained in this Article shall preclude or in any way affect the benefits that a pensioner may be entitled to from any state, federal or private pension, retirement or other deferred compensation plan."

SECTION 6.(d)  This section becomes effective January 1, 2018.

PART VII. EFFECTIVE DATE

SECTION 7.  Except as otherwise provided, this act is effective when it becomes law.

In the General Assembly read three times and ratified this the 30th day of June, 2017.

Legislation enacted by the General Assembly this session again makes it possible for persons convicted of habitual impaired driving to (eventually) have their driving privileges restored.

S.L. 2017-176 (S 384) removed the sunset clause in the 2009 legislative act that created G.S. 20-19(e4), putting that statutory provision, which expired in December 1, 2016, back on the books.  Effective July 21, 2017, a person whose driver’s license is permanently revoked for a conviction of habitual impaired driving may have his or her driver’s license restored upon satisfying the following conditions:

The person’s license must have been revoked for at least 10 years following the completion of any sentence imposed for habitual impaired driving;

The person must not have been convicted of any criminal offense in any state or federal court in the 10 years preceding the date of the application; and

The person must not currently use alcohol, unlawfully use any controlled substance, or excessively use prescription drugs.

The person seeking to have his or her driver’s license restored must provide the DMV hearing officer before whom he or she appears with satisfactory proof that these conditions are satisfied.

The restoration of a person’s driver’s license pursuant to G.S. 20-19(e4) is conditioned upon the person only driving a vehicle equipped with ignition interlock and not driving with any measurable alcohol concentration. G.S. 20-17.8(b). These conditions remain in effect for seven years from the date of restoration. G.S. 20-17.8(c)(3).

Since the habitual DWI restoration provision was first enacted in 2009, 216 people have had their driver’s licenses restored. There are around 300 convictions for habitual impaired driving each year. Depending upon the numbers of people in this population who are able to satisfy the restoration criteria, restoration applications for such drivers could number in the hundreds each year.

If the legislative history is a guide, the pilot legislation enacted in 2009 to restore licenses to this population has been successful.  The first iteration of the restoration provision was set to expire in 2014.  It was then extended to 2016.  And now it is back on the books with no sunset date.

[trafficticketskissling]

New Regs for Automated Cars

www.kisslinglaw.com

Great blog from NC SOG on new legislature on automated cars.

Last month, the General Assembly ratified a bill authorizing the operation of fully autonomous vehicles on state roadways. The legislation is effective December 1, 2017.  If you expect your car to begin driving you to work later this fall, however, you’ll be disappointed. In this instance, legislation has outpaced the technology it regulates.

The legislation. North Carolina joined nineteen other states in regulating the operation of the autonomous vehicles when Governor Roy Cooper signed House Bill 469 last week.

S.L. 2017-166 (H 469) enacts new Article 18 in Chapter 20 (G.S. § 20-400 – 403) to regulate the operation of fully autonomous vehicles. A “fully autonomous vehicle” is a motor vehicle that is equipped with an automated driving system that does not require an occupant of the vehicle to perform any portion of the operational or tactical control of the vehicle when the automated driving system is engaged. In fact, to qualify as a fully autonomous vehicle any equipment that permits an occupant to perform part of the driving task must be stowed or made unusable so that an occupant cannot assume control of the vehicle when the automated driving system is engaged.

In engineering lingo, fully autonomous vehicles are classified at SAE Levels 4 and 5. The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration explains these classifications this way:

At SAE Level 4, an automated system can conduct the driving task and monitor the driving environment, and the human need not take back control, but the automated system can operate only in certain environments and under certain conditions; and

At SAE Level 5, the automated system can perform all driving tasks, under all conditions that a human driver could perform them.

Vehicle requirements. New G.S. 20-401(g) permits the operation of fully autonomous vehicles on North Carolina roadways if the vehicle meets all of the following requirements:

(1) the vehicle complies with state and federal law and has been certified as being in compliance with federal motor vehicle safety standards;

(2) if involved in a crash, the vehicle is capable of stopping at the scene, contacting the appropriate law enforcement agency to report the crash, calling for medical assistance, and remaining at the scene until authorized to leave;

(3) the vehicle can achieve a “minimal risk condition” (meaning that if the automatic driving system fails, the vehicle comes to a complete stop);

(4) the vehicle is covered by a motor vehicle liability policy meeting statutory requirements; and

(5) the vehicle is lawfully registered.

No license necessary. New G.S. 20-401(a) states that the operator of a fully autonomous vehicle with the automated driving system engaged is not required to be licensed to drive.

The owner is responsible. New G.S. 20-401(d) provides that the person in whose name a fully autonomous vehicle is registered is responsible for any moving violations involving the vehicle.

Fully autonomous vehicles are no substitute for a babysitter. A person must be at least 12 years old to travel unsupervised in a fully autonomous vehicle. G.S. 20-401(c) makes it unlawful for the parent or legal guardian of a child under 12 to knowingly permit the child to occupy a fully autonomous vehicle that is in motion or that has the engine running unless the child is being supervised by a person who is at least 18 years old.

Preemption. Local governments are prohibited under new G.S. 20-401(f) from enacting laws regulating fully autonomous vehicles or vehicles that are equipped with an automated driving system. Local governments may, however, continue to regulate traffic as authorized in Chapter 153A and Chapter 160A of the General Statutes so long as the regulations apply to motor vehicles generally.

Fully Autonomous Vehicle Committee established. New G.S. 20-403 creates a Fully Autonomous Vehicle Committee within the North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) and specifies the categories of persons who shall comprise the 17-member committee. The committee must meet at least four times a year to consider matters related to fully autonomous vehicle technology, review the application of state motor vehicle law to fully autonomous vehicles, make recommendations regarding the testing of fully autonomous vehicles, make recommendations for DOT rules and ordinances, and make recommendations to the General Assembly on necessary changes to state law.

Where can I get one of these vehicles?  Nowhere just yet.

Ford Motor Company says it will produce a fully autonomous vehicle by 2021. But the vehicle it promises is a Level 4 vehicle, which means that it is fully autonomous only in certain areas and under certain conditions. An industry analyst explained here that such a car may only be fully autonomous in a geo-fenced area, such as the area of Pittsburgh where Uber is testing self-driving cars.

It may be another decade before Level 5 automation—think a vehicle with no steering wheel or pedals—is available.  But when it is, North Carolina will be ready.

[trafficticketskissling]

Duty to Report Accidents

www.kisslinglaw.com

Great article on what accidents need to be reported to police by Shea Denning of the NC SOG.

The general rule for a driver involved in a crash in which a person is injured or at least $1,000 in property damages occurs is this: The driver must stop his vehicle at the scene and must remain there with the vehicle until a law enforcement officer completes the crash investigation or authorizes the driver to leave and the vehicle to be removed. There is, however, an exception to this rule. That exception led to yesterday’s court of appeals opinion in State v. Scaturro, reversing a driver’s conviction on charges that he left the scene of a crash.

What is the exception? A driver may leave a crash scene in his vehicle to call for a law enforcement officer, to call for medical assistance or treatment, or to remove himself or others from significant risk of injury. G.S. 20-166. A driver who leaves for one of these purposes must return with the vehicle to the accident scene within a reasonable period of time, unless otherwise instructed by a law enforcement officer.

An additional responsibility. In addition to stopping and remaining at the scene, the driver of a vehicle involved in a crash must provide reasonable assistance to any person injured in the crash. Reasonable assistance includes calling for medical assistance.

What happened in State v. Scaturro? The defendant in Scaturro was driving his car in Wilmington, NC when he struck a boy riding a bicycle, who was making a U-turn around a median in the road. The boy was thrown from the bicycle, and the left side of his head, shoulder and elbow struck the pavement as he skidded across the road. His left ear was nearly severed in the fall.

The defendant got out of his car and saw that the boy was profusely bleeding. He gave the boy a rag to hold against his head. The boy called 911, but while he was on the phone, the defendant said he would take him to the hospital. The boy got into the defendant’s car and the defendant drove “‘like a maniac to get [him] to the hospital.’”  When the boy got out of the defendant’s car at the hospital, he made note of the defendant’s license plate number. The boy’s torn ear was removed in surgery immediately following the accident, and he has undergone additional surgeries since that time.

Two days after the accident, a highway patrol trooper located the defendant and asked him about the accident. The defendant admitted his involvement, and was arrested. He was indicted for one count of felony hit and run resulting in serious bodily injury in violation of N.C.G.S. § 20-166(a). The indictment alleged that he “unlawfully, willfully, and feloniously did fail to remain at the scene” of a crash.

At defendant’s trial on the hit and run charges, the court instructed the jury that, in order for the defendant to be guilty of the offense, the State was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that “defendant’s failure to remain at the scene of the crash was willful, that is intentional.” The court defined intent as “a mental attitude seldom provable by direct evidence” and explained that intent “must ordinarily be proved by circumstances from which it may be inferred.”

Issue on appeal. The defendant argued on appeal that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on willfulness.   He argued that the evidence showed that he only left the scene of the accident to take the injured boy to the nearest hospital, which is permitted under N.C.G.S. § 20-166(a) and (b), and therefore he did not willfully violate the statute. In response, the State argued that the defendant was not entitled to an instruction on willfulness because the statute does not permit a driver to leave the scene of an accident at all—not even to obtain medical assistance. Because the defendant did not object at trial to the jury instructions, the court of appeals considered whether the failure to instruct on willfulness was plain error. To meet that standard, it must be probable that absent the instructional error the jury would have returned a different verdict.

Court’s analysis.  The court of appeals quickly concluded that the trial court’s jury instructions were erroneous as G.S. 20-166(a) penalizes only willful violations of the statute. To be willful, an act must be both intentional and without justification or excuse. Thus, the court explained, a defendant might leave the scene of an accident intentionally, but still not willfully violate G.S. 20-166(a) if the intentional departure was justified or with excuse.

In considering whether the error had a probable impact on the jury’s verdict, the court noted that the defendant’s sole defense to the charges was that he was authorized to leave the crash scene; indeed, the defendant said he was required to leave to procure medical help for the boy. The defendant further contended that his failure to return to the scene was not willful as he was in an extremely emotional state and was traumatized by the accident. There was evidence at trial to support the defendant’s arguments.

The appellate court concluded that, given this context, the trial court’s failure to provide an instruction on willfulness deprived the defendant “of the gravamen of his basis for acquittal.” Had he received the instruction, the court reasoned, “it is at least probable that a jury would have concluded that [the] [d]efendant had a justification or excuse for leaving the scene and failing to return.”

The court reversed the defendant’s convictions and remanded for a new trial.

What is the scope of the exception?  To “prevent further confusion and danger” the court went on to explain that a driver may lawfully leave a crash scene to obtain medical care for himself or another injured person. The court reasoned that even though G.S. 20-166(a) instructs that drivers may only leave the scene to call for aid, that authorization is expanded by subsection (b)’s requirement that drivers render reasonable assistance to any person injured in a crash, which can include, but is not limited to, calling for medical assistance.

The court explained that “taking a seriously injured individual to the hospital to receive medical treatment is not prohibited . . .  in the event that such assistance is reasonable under the circumstances.” In fact, the court noted, violation of the directive in G.S. 20-166(b) to provide reasonable assistance is itself a Class 1 misdemeanor.

[trafficticketskissling]

New Deferral Program for Unlicensed, Undocumented Drivers

www.kisslinglaw.com

Great article on this issue.  I do not usually post the comments but I thought this one was thought provoking.  Thanks to Shea Denning for her post.

A few weeks ago, she wrote about a Stanford University study suggesting that granting driver’s licenses to unauthorized immigrants improves overall traffic safety. That approach is not an option in North Carolina, where unauthorized immigrants have been ineligible to obtain a driver’s license, learner’s permit or identification card since 2006. Recognizing that many unauthorized immigrants drive regardless of whether they are licensed, the district attorney in Orange and Chatham Counties announced this week a new policy for disposing of no operator’s license charges against such drivers, provided they meet certain conditions.

The News and Observer reports that the district attorney’s office in Orange and Chatham Counties will dismiss charges of no operator’s license, a Class 3 misdemeanor, if the person charged is ineligible to be licensed for immigration-related reasons and he or she provides an identification card and completes a driving school and civics education course. Orange County Justice United, a nonprofit advocacy group that lobbied for the change, has posted this overview of the deferral program on its website.

The overview document states that the program will not be available to individuals charged with no operator’s license in conjunction with other charges or who are ineligible to be licensed due to prior revocations, moving violations, unpaid tickets, or other offenses. Orange-Chatham District Attorney Jim Woodall told reporters that the program would provide driver’s education to a group of citizens who had not before received that type of instruction and would help to build trust between the law enforcement and immigrant communities.

“Faith-IDs” are listed in the overview as a preferred type of identification for unauthorized immigrants to provide to the district attorney’s office. These identification cards are issued by FaithAction, a Greensboro organization that launched an initiative in 2013 to provide identification cards to North Carolina residents who lacked access to government issued forms of identification. The Greensboro Police Department has publicly supported the FaithAction’s efforts, sending Spanish-speaking officers to identification card events.

In 2016, more than 121,766 people were charged statewide with driving without a license. Slightly more than 2,000 people were charged with this offense in Orange and Chatham Counties last year. Orange County Justice United reports that 77 percent of drivers charged with no operator’s license in Orange and Chatham Counties from 2008 to 2015 were Latino. They did not report how many of these drivers would have been eligible for deferral under the new program.

In addition to avoiding a misdemeanor record, defendants whose charges are dismissed under the deferral program will not be assessed the $190 in court costs that apply to conviction of a misdemeanor Chapter 20 offense or the $50 fine that typically accompanies a no operator’s license conviction.

One comment on “New Deferral Program for Unauthorized Immigrants Charged with NOL”

Jon

April 21, 2017 at 3:02 pm

This is utterly absurd.  How can anyone associated with enforcing the law, as it is written, agree to this?  When people decide to not enforce the law, in certain cases, it leads to abuse and discrimination.  The law should be plainly written and enforced in the same way, regardless of who the charged person is.  That is the only way that ALL people are treated the same under the law. By giving a certain group of people a pass on the law, the law cannot be enforced fairly across the board.  What about an African American or a white person that does not have a license?  Different Standard?

[trafficticketskissling]

NC Seat Belt Law

www.kisslinglaw.com

Great post from NC SOG.  Thanks to Shea Denning for the post.  As I teach a 4 hour safe driving course, I am amazed at the reasons young people give for not wearing their seat belts.  In one class, we had a student who wore his seat belt during the day but not at night.  His reasoning was that at night he did not want to get trapped in the car in case of an accident.  In every class, we have a least one student who claims to have a friend who lived because they were not wearing their seat belt.  Maybe it is a generational thing but I cannot imagine not wearing my seat belt.

State law has mandated seat belt use by North Carolina motorists for more than thirty years. The seat belt law has, however, changed a bit over time. As a result, not everyone is clear on who is covered, what is required, and what the penalties are for violations. This post covers the particulars of North Carolina’s seat belt requirements and addresses three common areas of confusion.

1. Everyone in the car must buckle up.

G.S. 20-135.2A

(a) requires that each occupant of a motor vehicle manufactured with seat belts have a seatbelt properly fastened about his or her body when the vehicle is in forward motion on a street or highway.

When it was first enacted

, G.S. 20-135.2A (1985) only required seat belt use by drivers and front seat passengers. Ten years ago, the

General Assembly amended the law

to require that everyone in the vehicle, including rear seat passengers, buckle up.

A separate statute,

G.S. 20-137.1

, requires that drivers with passengers who are under 16 years of age have such passengers secured in a child passenger restraint system or seat belt.

A handful of exceptions to the seat-belts-for-all-occupants requirement are listed in G.S. 20-135.2A(c).They apply to the following persons and motor vehicles:

Drivers or occupants of noncommercial motor vehicles with medical or physical conditions that prevent seat belt restraint;

Rural letter carriers;

Newspaper delivery persons while delivering newspapers;

Drivers and passengers who frequently stop and leave their vehicles or deliver property from their vehicles if the vehicle’s speed between stops is 20 mph or less;

Property carrying vehicles used for agricultural purpose in intrastate commerce;

Motor vehicles that are not required to be equipped with seat belts under federal law;

Occupants of a motor home other than the driver and front seat passengers;

Persons in the custody of a law enforcement officer who are being transported in the back of a law enforcement vehicle; and

Passengers of a residential garbage or recycling truck while the truck is operating during collection rounds.

2. A motor vehicle may not be stopped for a back-seat passenger’s failure to buckle up.

A law enforcement officer who has reasonable grounds to believe that a driver or front seat passenger does not have a seat belt properly fastened about his or her body may stop the car to investigate.  A law enforcement officer who has reasonable grounds to believe that a rear seat occupant is not wearing a seat belt may not. That’s because G.S. 20-135.2A(d1) categorizes the failure to buckle up in the back seat as a secondary violation for which a vehicle may not be stopped. A law enforcement officer who has lawfully stopped a vehicle for another reason and learns in the process of a rear seat belt violation may, of course, cite the driver for this offense. Nearly as many charges were issued for unbuckled rear seat passengers in 2015 (12,847) as there were for unrestrained front-seat passengers (13,808). Charges for both categories were vastly outnumbered by the 108,320 charges issued for unbuckled drivers that year.

3. You need a statute book and a calculator to figure out the penalty for front seat violations.

The monetary penalty for a seat belt violation has significantly increased since seat belt use was first mandated. Back in 1986, a violation of the seat belt law (then, as now, an infraction) was punishable by a fine of $25. No court costs were assessed. Today, the penalty for a front-seat occupant’s failure to wear a seat belt is $25.50 plus $153.50 in district court costs.

That’s a total of $179

.

It is much simpler to calculate the costs of a rear seat violation. The penalty is a flat $10 and no costs may be assessed.

Are statutory amendments on the horizon?  

The Child Fatality Task Force, a legislative study commission,

has recommended

that law enforcement officers be permitted to stop vehicles for a back seat passenger’s failure to wear a seat belt and that the fine for back seat violations be increased to $25.  The task force contends that these changes are necessary to meet occupant protection criteria established by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and to shore up certain federal funds. The task force further contends that making rear seat belt requirements a primary enforcement violation will increase seat belt usage. The group cites research findings that a greater percentage of fatal and serious injuries occur to unrestrained rear seat occupants than to unrestrained front seat occupants. It also states an unrestrained back seat passenger can injure a front seat passenger in a crash.

[marymosley]

News Roundup

The major national criminal law news of the week was the arrest of Jeffrey Epstein on federal sex-trafficking charges involving underage girls.  Epstein, who often is referred to as a billionaire financier though the extent and source of his wealth is largely shrouded in mystery, pleaded guilty in 2008 to prostitution charges in Florida state court as part of an unusually lenient plea agreement that allowed him to avoid serious federal sex crime charges and shielded any of his co-conspirators from prosecution.  That plea agreement was approved by current Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta, who was the United States Attorney in the Southern District of Florida at the time.  Over the years, Epstein has been connected to President Donald Trump and former President Bill Clinton.  Keep reading for more news.

Ticket Irregularities.  WNCN reports that two North Carolina State Highway Patrol troopers are under investigation for “traffic ticket irregularities” in Harnett County, and that one of the troopers involved has been “separated” from the Highway Patrol.  The report says that investigators are looking into whether the troopers wrote citations without actually serving them on the person who was being cited, meaning that the person would be unaware of the charges until he or she went to court or tried to pay their fine.  Jason R. Benson was separated from the Highway Patrol and Christopher S. Carter is on administrative duty during the ongoing investigation.

Officer Shot.  WRAL reports that multiple law enforcement agencies are investigating the non-fatal shooting of a Henderson police officer early yesterday morning.  The officer, who had not been publicly identified at the time of writing, was investigating a shooting that occurred around 9pm Wednesday evening.  While interviewing possible witnesses around midnight, the officer was hit by a bullet fired from a passing car.  Anyone with information about the incident should contact the Henderson police department.

Peeping Tom.  Another report from WRAL says that Raleigh police are asking for the public’s help in identifying a man who has been caught on security cameras in the Falls River neighborhood sneaking around houses and exposing himself.  Images of the suspect and contact information for police can be found at the WRAL link.

Coach Charged.  The Greensboro News & Record reports that the recently-hired boys basketball coach at Southwest Guilford High School has been charged with taking indecent liberties with a student at North Davidson High School, his previous employer.  James Brandon Mullis was arrested on the charge last week, and Southwest Guilford said that his contract would not be renewed for the upcoming school year.

General Accused of Sexual Misconduct.  The Associated Press reports that the nomination of General John Hyten to be the next vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is in jeopardy following allegations that he subjected a senior military officer to a series of unwanted sexual advances.  The officer told the Associated Press that Hyten kissed, hugged, and rubbed himself against her in 2017 while she was one of his aides.  The officer also said that he tried to derail her career after she rebuffed him.  An Air Force investigation conducted after the officer reported the conduct did not reveal sufficient evidence to recommend any administrative punishment for Hyten or charge him with a crime.

Illegal Beer.  A Utah beer company has been stalled in its efforts to sell “Polygamy Porter” in North Carolina according to the Fayetteville Observer.  In a letter to the Utah Brewers Cooperative, the North Carolina Alcoholic Beverage Commission said that it refused to approve the beer for sale because “[p]olygamy is illegal.”  A quick review of the General Statutes suggests that changing the name to “Non-Disruptive Public Intoxication Porter” could be a viable alternative.

The post News Roundup appeared first on North Carolina Criminal Law.

News Roundup published first on https://immigrationlawyerto.tumblr.com/