Justia Lawyer Rating
best Lawyer
Super Lawyer - Top 100
best Lawyers
Avvo Rating 10.0
AV Preeminent
The National Trial Lawyers
The best Lawyers in America
CLEA
Advocates for Justice
Business North Carolina Legal Elite - 2023
DUI Defense
NBTA
DUI Defense Lawyers Association
*For additional information regarding the criterion for inclusion or membership for lawyer associations, awards, & certifications click image for link.

by

Do “fighting words” still matter under North Carolina’s assault law? That question sounds old-fashioned, but it goes straight to a real-life issue in modern practice. Can insulting, baiting, or humiliating language still matter if an argument turns physical? American jurisprudence historically recognized the phrase “fighting words,” yet North Carolina assault law remains centered on conduct, apprehension of immediate bodily harm, unlawful touching, public fighting, and breaches of the peace, not on whether the insult itself felt like an invitation to swing.

That distinction matters because the phrase “fighting words” carries a kind of cultural memory. It suggests a world in which the law openly acknowledged that certain insults could bring on an immediate fight. In ordinary conversation, that still resonates. In court, the answer is much tighter. The constitutional doctrine may, at least conceptually, survive in a narrow First Amendment lane. North Carolina assault law, by contrast, generally asks a different set of questions. Was there an attempt to strike or injure someone? Was there a show of violence that created a reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm? Was there an unlawful touching? Was there a public fight amounting to an affray? Those are not the same questions as whether somebody said something vile, disrespectful, or goading.

The phrase comes from First Amendment doctrine, not from a North Carolina assault statute

Continue reading

by

N.C.G.S. § 20-141.4(a3) governs the offense of felony serious injury by vehicle in North Carolina. This statute establishes a specific three-part evidentiary framework that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt. To secure a conviction, the prosecution must demonstrate that the defendant unintentionally caused serious injury to another person, that the defendant was engaged in impaired driving under N.C.G.S. § 20-138.1 or N.C.G.S. § 20-138.2, and that the impaired driving was a proximate cause of the serious injury.

That structure mirrors the framework used in felony death by vehicle prosecutions under the same statute. The difference lies in the injury element. One offense requires proof that a person died. The other requires proof that the crash produced a qualifying serious injury.

Because the statute requires impairment to be a proximate cause of the injury, the prosecution must prove more than the presence of alcohol or drugs. The State must show a causal relationship between impaired driving and the physical harm suffered by the alleged victim. That requirement often becomes a central litigation issue in serious crash cases involving multiple causal factors, complicated crash dynamics, or disputed medical evidence.

Continue reading

by

If you hold a Concealed Handgun Permit in North Carolina, or plan to apply for one, you should understand a practical reality. A DWI charge, substance use concerns, or related findings can create real exposure for revoking your permit status, even though the legal mechanisms are not automatic.

Gun rights litigation at the national level tends to draw headlines. What receives far less attention is how North Carolina law can affect your concealed handgun permit when alcohol or drug issues enter the picture.

This is where careful legal analysis matters.

Continue reading

by

The United States Supreme Court’s pending review of the federal firearm ban for unlawful drug users presents a deceptively simple question with potentially wide consequences. At issue is whether Congress may prohibit firearm possession by someone classified as an unlawful user of a controlled substance, even when that person is sober at the time of possession.

The short version is this. The constitutional landscape after Bruen has made status-based firearm prohibitions more vulnerable than they were a decade ago. But vulnerability does not automatically mean invalidation.

After examining the Court’s recent Second Amendment decisions, the current judicial philosophy of the justices, and the institutional posture of the Court, the Over Under prediction here is intended to be relatively straightforward.

Continue reading

by

The 0.3% Dilemma | NC Marijuana Laws vs. Second Amendment Rights

In North Carolina, the legal distinction between a state-regulated commodity and a federal felony is 0.3% Delta-9 THC. As the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to rule on the constitutionality of firearm bans for cannabis users, North Carolinians face a potentially dangerous legal paradox. Hemp and marijuana are chemically and visually indistinguishable, yet possessing the wrong one can lead to a lifetime loss of gun rights, in addition to other potential criminal consequences both in federal and state court.

Why North Carolina’s Hemp Laws May Cause an Evidentiary Crisis for Gun Owners

Continue reading

by

If someone you care about has been arrested and taken to the Mecklenburg County Jail, the first question is simple and urgent. When can they get out? For violent felonies, the answer is now governed by Iryna’s Law (Session Law 2025-93), which took effect in December 2025. Bond decisions in Charlotte may involve rebuttable presumptions under N.C.G.S. § 15A-533 and structured judicial review, which can delay pretrial release for certain offenses.

This guide explains what actually happens in Charlotte after an arrest, how pretrial release decisions are made, and what steps matter in the first hours and days.

1. The Initial Appearance in Charlotte | What to Expect at the Mecklenburg County Jail

Continue reading

by

Felony death by vehicle in North Carolina is a felony criminal charge, not an aggravated traffic offense. Under N.C.G.S. § 20-141.4(a1), the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the driver was impaired under G.S. § 20-138.1 or § 20-138.2 and that the impaired driving was a proximate cause of another person’s death. The charge does not require intent to harm. It does not require a prior record. It does not require recklessness beyond the impairment itself. It requires proof of impaired driving and proof that the impaired driving caused a fatality. The consequences include the potential for active prison time under North Carolina’s Structured Sentencing Act, permanent driver’s license revocation, a felony criminal record, and exposure to civil liability.

1. Felony Death by Vehicle | The Statutory Framework

North Carolina General Statute § 20-141.4(a1) defines felony death by vehicle through three distinct elements. First, the Defendant unintentionally caused the death of another. Second, the Defendant was engaged in the offense of impaired driving under G.S. § 20-138.1 or G.S. § 20-138.2. Third, the commission of the impaired driving offense was a proximate cause of the death.

Continue reading

by

Misdemeanor death by vehicle in North Carolina is a criminal charge, not a traffic ticket. Under N.C.G.S. 20-141.4(a2), the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a specific traffic law was violated and that the violation was a proximate cause of another person’s death. The charge does not require intent to harm. It does not require impaired driving or recklessness. It requires proof of a traffic violation and proof that the violation caused a fatality. The consequences are serious, lasting, and begin the moment the charge is filed.

1. Misdemeanor Death by Vehicle | Statutory Offense in North Carolina

North Carolina General Statute 20-141.4(a2) defines misdemeanor death by vehicle as an offense with three elements. First, the person was engaged in the violation of any State law or local ordinance applying to the operation or use of a vehicle or to the regulation of traffic. Second, that violation was a proximate cause of the death of another person. Third, the death was unintentional. Every element must be present, and the State must prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt.

Continue reading

by

Let me start by saying this. I love lawyers. I am one. I am a former president of the North Carolina Advocates for Justice (NCAJ), an association of criminal defense, personal injury, and family law lawyers.

Some of my best friends are lawyers. The profession as a whole is comprised of noble, hard-working professionals dedicated to justice, due process, and helping others.

AND if you ever want to truly test your patience, try defending an attorney when the tables are turned, and the lawyer becomes the defendant.

Continue reading

by

The Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees defendants charged with a crime the right to legal counsel. The North Carolina State Constitution reinforces that protection in Article I, Section 23 Declaration of Rights. A lot of folks facing a criminal allegation assume that legal right is absolute. As long as they want an attorney, the Court must provide one. That’s not always the case. Indeed, there are things you can do to lose your right to a lawyer.

TL;DR: The February 2026 NC Court of Appeals Decision, State v. Webber, upheld a trial judge’s decision to strip a defendant of the right to counsel and force them to stand trial alone. The defendant had burned through four appointed attorneys over several years, privately retained a fifth, refused court-appointed counsel, and walked into the courtroom on the day of trial without a lawyer. The Court found the defendant forfeited and otherwise waived the right to counsel through their conduct.

North Carolina courts look at the totality of circumstances before stripping a defendant of the right to counsel. No single act automatically triggers forfeiture. What follows are the seven patterns set forth in Webber that, alone or in combination, can cost a defendant their lawyer:

Continue reading