Articles Posted in Criminal Defense

Waiver of Counsel: Legal Framework and Standard of Reviewwaiver-of-counsel-in-north-carolina

Criminal defendants have a fundamental right to the assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I of the North Carolina Constitution. A defendant also has the right to proceed without counsel and represent himself or herself, but such waiver of counsel must be made knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily. North Carolina law requires trial courts to conduct a thorough inquiry before accepting a waiver of the right to counsel.

This inquiry is codified in N.C.G.S. § 15A-1242, which provides that a judge may allow a defendant to proceed pro se only after confirming that the defendant:

In North Carolina v. Capps, the North Carolina Court of Appeals examined two key issues arising from a felonious possession of stolen goods conviction: (1) whether the WHAT-IS-CONSTRUCTIVE-POSSESSION-IN-NORTH-CAROLINA-300x168 evidence was sufficient to prove the defendant’s constructive possession of stolen property; and (2) whether the trial court erred by excluding as hearsay certain testimony during cross-examination.

The published April 2025 opinion provides insight into how appellate courts analyze hearsay preservation requirements and the evidentiary threshold for constructive possession in criminal cases. The court ultimately found no error, emphasizing the importance of proper trial procedure (like making an offer of proof for excluded evidence) and outlining the incriminating circumstances that supported submitting the case to the jury. Below, we break down the court’s reasoning on each issue and highlight practical lessons for attorneys and judges handling similar evidentiary and sufficiency questions.

Facing serious felony charges can be overwhelming. At Powers Law Firm, we offer steady, experienced guidance to help navigate the legal system with clarity and care. We represent clients across the Charlotte metro region, including Union, Iredell, Mecklenburg, Gaston, Rowan, and Lincoln Counties. To talk through your situation and explore your options, call 704-342-4357.

This case is a reminder: if you’re raising a claim of sexual discrimination in jury selection, the challenge must be made clearly and at the right time—or it may be lost forever. The decision also highlights how hard it is to get relief on these issues after conviction.

Here’s what we’ll cover in this post:

Helping explain the 0.3 THC threshold and marijuana vs hemp issues to the jury likely necessitates a jury instruction that adds important language to pattern jury instruction that fully and accurately reflects the definition of MARIJUANA-JURY-INSTRUCTION-IN-NORTH-CAROLINA hemp consistent with N.C.G.S. 90-87, NC PJI 260.10, NC PJI 260-15, NC PJI 260.17 et al,  and North Carolina v. Ruffin.  To that end, it’s helpful to provide specific proposed language to the Court to address the 0.3% THC threshold during the charge conference. 

Obviously, whether that’s necessary and/or appropriate depends on the fact pattern and must be tailored to case specifics.  To be clear, there is more involved than THC concentration, particularly as it may pertain to cannabis concentrate (“shatter”).  Courts are still addressing how to apply these legal distinctions.

At Powers Law Firm, we help clients navigate these issues in court. If you have questions about how hemp laws may impact your case or are facing marijuana-related charges, TEXT or call attorney Bill Powers at 704-342-4357 or email Bill@CarolinaAttorneys.com to discuss your situation.

Under North Carolina law, “marijuana” is a controlled substance defined to exclude legal hemp. Following the 2018 federal Farm Bill, NC amended its statutes to align with the 0.3% THC NC-HEMP-LAWS threshold. Specifically, hemp is defined as cannabis (any part of the plant, including derivatives) with ≤0.3% delta-9 THC by dry weight. Marijuana covers cannabis plants or extracts except those meeting the hemp definition.

In effect, cannabis with more than 0.3% THC is illegal “marijuana,” while cannabis at or below 0.3% THC is legal hemp. This distinction can be critical in criminal cases – it means a defendant should not be convicted of a marijuana offense for possessing hemp. However, because hemp and marijuana look and smell identical, this threshold poses challenges in court​. 

Juries may benefit from guidance to avoid conflating legal hemp with illegal marijuana. Defense attorneys have increasingly sought jury instructions to clarify this 0.3% THC requirement as part of the definition of the crime. 

The North Carolina Court of Appeals’ recent decision in State v. Ruffin, ___ N.C. App. ___ (Mar. 5, 2025), provides MARIJUANA-IDENTIFICATION-IN-COURT guidance on marijuana identification in the post-hemp era. The defendant in Ruffin was convicted of multiple drug offenses, including the sale and delivery of marijuana, arising from a controlled buy in 2021​.

On appeal, the accused challenged the identification of the seized plant material as marijuana (arguing it could have been legal hemp), the admissibility of both lay and expert testimony under the North Carolina Rules of Evidence, the sufficiency of the evidence to distinguish marijuana from hemp, the trial court’s jury instructions, and several aspects of his sentencing​

The Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions and sentences. This article analyzes Ruffin and its implications for North Carolina law, with specific reference to Rule 702 Testimony by Expert Witnesses.

As hip-hop mogul Sean “P. Diddy” Combs heads to trial on federal sex trafficking charges, a critical question looms: can he get an jury-selection impartial jury despite his fame and the salacious allegations? This is no ordinary case – nearly everyone has heard of P. Diddy. The worry is that half the jury pool could be star-struck fans while the other half have already judged him guilty based on headlines.

The accusations are lurid – prosecutors say Combs ran a 20-year sex trafficking scheme involving sordid sex parties– and these details could provoke strong reactions, making it even harder to find jurors who can set aside preconceptions and focus on the evidence.

Selecting a fair jury in high-profile cases poses significant challenges due to the defendant’s celebrity status, extensive pretrial publicity, and the explosive nature of the allegations. Jury selection, known as voir dire, is intended to uncover biases or preconceived notions jurors might hold, but in cases involving a celebrity, this becomes uniquely difficult.


Hemolysis involves the rupture of red blood cells in a blood sample. In the context of criminal charges, this can affect how accurately labs measure blood alcohol concentration (BAC). Mechanical factors like needle gauge selection, centrifugation practices, storage conditions, or simple delays can lead to hemolysis. The result may be an inflated or deflated BAC reading. For someone facing Hemolysis-BAC-Blood-Alcohol-Concentration DUI charges or other criminal matters where BAC plays a role, understanding hemolysis, BAC testing, and its implications can help in reviewing the evidence.


If you have questions about the specifics of your legal matter, the legal team at Powers Law Firm is available for consultation. You may call or text 704-342-4357. You may also email Bill Powers at Bill@CarolinaAttorneys.com.

Below is a brief syllabus of the main topics covered in this document. Each entry links to a corresponding section that explains how hemolysis occurs, how labs test for BAC, and why these details may shape legal strategies.


This article discusses how alcohol normally travels through your body when you’re alive, how that changes once life ends, and why postmortem shifts can influence criminal defense in North Carolina. We will also explore the potential legal implications of anBLOOD-ALCOHOL-CONCENTRATION inaccurate or misleading BAC when the decedent—who, in criminal cases, may be considered a victim—had alcohol in their system.

By clarifying the complexities of forensic toxicology, our goal is to explain why thorough investigation and analysis by forensic toxicologists may be an essential aspect of building a defense strategy.

It is tempting to assume that the number on a lab report reflects an exact level of intoxication at the time of death, but the science behind postmortem BAC is often far more nuanced and complicated. Factors such as redistribution, laboratory processing, and even microbial activity can alter the reading—sometimes making it appear higher or lower than it actually was when the person was alive.

In North Carolina, if someone is killed during the commission or attempted commission of certain felonies involving a deadly weapon, felony-child-abuse-charges-in-north-carolina the offense may be charged as first-degree murder under what is commonly called the “felony murder rule.” Under this doctrine, a homicide arising from the perpetration or attempted perpetration of such a felony is treated as first-degree murder, even in the absence of premeditation or deliberation.

The recent appellate decision State v. Middleton (N.C. Ct. App. 2025) sheds light on how felony murder interacts with allegations of felony child abuse. While the underlying facts involved minors and grave injuries, the published opinion concentrates on the broader legal principles relevant to attorneys, law students, and others interested in North Carolina’s felony murder framework.

This post covers:

Contact Information