Criminal Defense

June 12, 2026

Discarded DNA Evidence in North Carolina Criminal Cases

Discarded DNA evidence in North Carolina criminal cases can start with something as ordinary as a Wingstop cup. A fork, straw, napkin, cigarette butt, water bottle, soda can, or coffee lid may carry skin cells, saliva, or other biological material. When the police believe a suspect used that item, that may link an unsolved crime scene profile to a named person and raise immediate questions about abandonment, curtilage, search and seizure, and what the DNA result actually proves.

A California cold-case arrest reported on June 5, 2026 by USA Today shows a somewhat common method at work. Investigators reportedly observed a suspect during a restaurant meal, collected the items he left behind, including a Wingstop cup, a fork, a straw, and a napkin, then compared DNA recovered from those items to evidence from an older crime scene, and that comparison reportedly supported the arrest.

While the reported West Coast case is not North Carolina legal authority, from the criminal defense lawyer’s perspective, we do encounter the handling of discarded DNA in North Carolina on occasion, particularly in the disposition of “cold case” files involving some of the most serious types of criminal charges alleging things like murder and sex crimes.

June 9, 2026

Bad Search Warrant Affidavit | North Carolina

by Carolina Attorneys

When Police Change Facts in a North Carolina Search Warrant Affidavit

In a North Carolina criminal case, a police report is generally an investigative record. It can be updated and supplemented as the investigation moves. A search warrant affidavit is a sworn factual statement submitted to a neutral judicial official to justify a search before it occurs. When an officer changes wording, drops an inconvenient detail, adds a salient fact, or reshapes the narrative on the way to a warrant, the legal question is not whether a report was “corrected.” Instead, defense counsel might reasonably ask whether the sworn affidavit truthfully reports what the officer knew, or whether the warrant became a formality used to ratify a search the officer had already decided to make.

North Carolina law does not demand a perfect affidavit. Courts do not strike warrants over every typo, clumsy phrase, or mistaken background fact. But there is a line past which forgiving de minimis errors starts to look like adoption or ratification of sloppy processes. If courts routinely excuse factual strengthening, after-the-fact wording, and selective omissions, that habit can begin to function as permission, if not authorization. It signals that an affidavit based on factually slight evidence might be rescued by sharper language and that an oath, affirmation, and signature will paper over the gap. That is not the order set out by the Fourth Amendment and Article I, Section 20 of the North Carolina Constitution.

June 6, 2026

Judge Rejects Plea Bargain | What Happens in North Carolina?

by Carolina Attorneys

A plea bargain in North Carolina Superior Court is more than an understanding between lawyers. While a negotiated resolution, the terms and conditions of the plea arrangement are subject to judicial approval.

When a judge rejects a plea deal, the case changes substantially in the courtroom, in real time. A defendant who came to court prepared to resolve the case now faces a different procedural posture and related (potential) long-term consequences of a rejected plea.

The State’s sentencing recommendation no longer controls the path forward. As such, defense lawyers tend to respond immediately, on the record, before the defendant’s transcript answers, factual-basis assent, or sentencing admissions create confusion about what remains usable after the arrangement fails.

June 2, 2026

Restitution as a Condition of Probation in North Carolina

by Carolina Attorneys

Restitution as a condition of probation in North Carolina presents a deceptively simple question. What happens if the defendant does not pay?

That question cannot be answered by looking only at the unpaid balance. A restitution order can operate in two legal lanes at the same time. It can be a criminal court condition tied to probation, deferred prosecution, or conditional discharge. It can also become a civil judgment collection device for the victim. Those lanes are related, but they are not the same. Confusing them can lead to overstatement by the State, false comfort for the defendant, and frustration for victims who expect a criminal restitution order to function like a private collection judgment.

The harder issue is not whether the Court ordered restitution. Instead, the big picture question is what remedy the Court may impose when restitution remains unpaid? Nonpayment may support a probation violation, termination of a conditional discharge, entry of judgment, criminal contempt, or later civil execution. But nonpayment does not automatically establish that the defendant should be imprisoned. North Carolina law requires consideration of willfulness, ability to pay, lawful excuse, the procedural posture of the case, and the remedy the Court is being asked to impose.

May 30, 2026

Racial Bias in Jury Selection | Batson Challenges

by Carolina Attorneys

On May 29, 2026, reporting surrounding the United States Supreme Court’s review of a Mississippi death penalty case again pushed one of the oldest constitutional problems in American criminal law back into public discussion. The issue involves racial discrimination in jury selection under Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), and whether prosecutors improperly struck black jurors during a capital murder trial.

The opinion matters far beyond Mississippi. Jury selection disputes are a regular aspect of criminal trials in North Carolina. Prosecutors, defense lawyers, and trial judges still wrestle with the practical reality that Batson litigation remains one of the hardest constitutional violations to prove cleanly and one of the easiest constitutional protections to weaken through procedural language. Readers should care because jury selection determines who exercises the power of judgment in a criminal courtroom. A constitutional right means little if discriminatory conduct can be repackaged as “strategy,” “demeanor,” or “trial preference.”

TL;DR Batson Challenges |Racial Bias During Voir Dire Jury Selection

May 24, 2026

Can police come into my house without a Warrant?

by Carolina Attorneys

Police can enter a home without a warrant under the emergency aid exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement. Also called the emergency assistance exception or emergency doctrine, this exception permits warrantless home entry when officers have an objectively reasonable basis to believe someone inside is seriously injured or imminently threatened with serious injury. On January 14, 2026, the United States Supreme Court decided Case v. Montana, reaffirming that probable cause is not required for emergency aid entry while rejecting a lower reasonable-suspicion approach. This guide explains when warrantless entry into a home may be lawful, what Case v. Montana changed, and how North Carolina courts will likely apply the doctrine.

Written by Bill Powers, a North Carolina criminal defense lawyer with 33 years (since 1992) of courtroom experience. Bill is a Board-Certified Criminal Law Specialist through the National Board of Trial Advocacy / National Board of Legal Specialty Certification and a former President of the North Carolina Advocates for Justice. Powers Law Firm represents clients in criminal, traffic, and impaired driving matters in the Charlotte area and accepts select serious felony driving and vehicular homicide cases across North Carolina.

Part I: Search Warrants | Constitutional Foundation

May 20, 2026

Traffic Ticket Infractions in North Carolina | Superior Court Jurisdiction

by Carolina Attorneys

On May 20, 2026, the North Carolina Court of Appeals decided State v. Myers, a case that may quietly create one of the stranger jurisdictional and constitutional problems in modern North Carolina traffic-stop litigation. The opinion itself appears relatively narrow at first glance. Superior Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction to adjudicate contested standalone traffic ticket infractions unless N.C.G.S. § 7A-271(d) applies, even if those infractions are indicted alongside related felony and misdemeanor charges. Digging a bit deeper, the opinion more subtly raises a harder question for defense lawyers going forward. What happens when the alleged traffic infraction is not properly triable in Superior Court, yet that same alleged violation is the entire constitutional basis for the felony stop, detention, seizure, or arrest?

TL;DR: A New Hanover County jury convicted defendant of felony fleeing to elude arrest by motor vehicle and misdemeanor resisting a public officer. The jury also found them responsible for two traffic infractions, those being failure to signal a lane change and failure to carry a valid driver’s license. The Superior Court consolidated the misdemeanor conviction with the infractions and entered judgment. The Court of Appeals vacated the consolidated judgment, holding that Superior Court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the contested standalone infractions because they were not lesser-included violations and the defendant did not admit responsibility. The fact that the infractions were included in an indictment returned by a grand jury did not cure the jurisdictional defect.

N.C.G.S. § 7A-253 sets forth that original and exclusive jurisdiction for the adjudication and disposition of infractions lies in District Court, except as provided in N.C.G.S. § 7A-271(d). Superior Court must submit an infraction to the jury when it is a lesser-included violation of a criminal action properly before the court. Superior Court may also accept an admission of responsibility to an infraction when it is either lesser-included or a related charge. Myers did not fit either category. The defendant did not admit responsibility, and the alleged infractions were not lesser-included violations of the felony or misdemeanor charges.

May 16, 2026

Child Facing Criminal Charges? | Don’t Be a Helicopter Parent

by Carolina Attorneys

WARNING: If your child is facing criminal charges in Charlotte and you don’t want to hear the truth, STOP READING NOW. This blog post isn’t for you. If you want to know how things really work in the legal system, from experienced defense lawyers who honestly care but also tell it like it is, what follows might save you a whole lot of heartache and pain.

Starting off, know this:

Defense lawyers understand your child is a good person

May 11, 2026

Substitute Expert Testimony in North Carolina | State v. Phillips 2026

by Carolina Attorneys

Substitute expert testimony in North Carolina criminal cases continues to develop, as evidence in the May 2026 Court of Appeals decision in State v. Phillips. A substitute expert may testify when the opinion comes from evidence the expert can independently review, such as photographs of visible injuries. The Confrontation Clause problem may be subject to review when the Rule 702 opinion depends on the truth of what an absent examiner recorded, measured, observed, charted, tested, or concluded.

That distinction matters in criminal defense because expert testimony can sound scientific even when it rests on human assumptions that were never tested in court. A jury may hear the word “independent” and assume the witness did the work. Phillips reminds lawyers, judges, and anyone facing criminal charges that the real question is not whether the witness has credentials. The real question may involve what the opinion is based on.

TL;DR | Substitute Expert Testimony

May 6, 2026

Working with Your Lawyer | Here’s What NOT to Do

by Carolina Attorneys

If you have a criminal charge, a traffic matter, an impaired driving case in North Carolina, or a related legal issue that might affect your license, liberty, family, job, reputation, or future, knowing how to work effectively with a defense lawyer is an important first step. Lawyers focus on case analysis, strategy, negotiation, and courtroom advocacy. The client’s role in that is important. We need to know, early on, what really happened.

That sounds simple until fear takes over. A pending case can make normally very reasonable folks act in ways that can hurt them in the long run. They start talking to witnesses, texting, and even trying to call the charging officer. Sometimes they explain themselves online or respond to a snarky comment on social media. Occasionally, clients hide facts from their lawyer because the truth seems too embarrassing.

To be clear, the lawyer-client relationship is not built on flattery, blind trust, or constant reassurance. Defense lawyers truly want to help their clients. That’s why we went to law school. We enjoy helping people. We want to make a difference. A solid professional relationship and trust can take time. Here’s What NOT To Do when it comes to working with your lawyer: