DUI Category Archives — Carolina Criminal Defense & DUI Lawyer Updates Published by Carolina Criminal Defense & DUI Lawyers

November 5, 2025

Auto-Brewery Syndrome DWI North Carolina

The Limits of Chemical Certainty: The Auto-Brewery Syndrome & DWI Charges

Auto-Brewery Syndrome (ABS) remains a bit of a theoretical curiosity. It represents a measurable biochemical anomaly during which yeast or bacteria residing in the gastrointestinal tract convert carbohydrates into ethanol within the human body.

Though somewhat rare, it is medically documented, scientifically verifiable in some instances, and possibly legally consequential, at least relative to DUI charges in North Carolina.

October 29, 2025

The Future of the Exclusionary Rule in North Carolina

by Carolina Attorneys

TL;DR Quick Take: The legacy of North Carolina v. Rogers reaches beyond suppression hearings. It redefines how courts balance government trust against the structural necessity of constitutional discipline. Whether this evolution strengthens justice or weakens liberty depends on how future courts interpret the limits of “reasonableness” in applying the Good Faith Exception to the Exclusionary Rule.

I. Constitutional Remedies and the Philosophy of Enforcement

Constitutional rights mean little without remedies that make them enforceable. The framers of the US Constitution understood this when they created mechanisms to restrain power through process.

October 22, 2025

Breath, Blood, and Bull: How the Breathalyzer Works

by Carolina Attorneys

This post continues the Breath, Blood, and Bull series, which explores how science, technology, and human judgment shape DWI enforcement in North Carolina.

The first article examined the limits of field sobriety testing. This installment turns to the machines that translate breath into evidence, using “breathalyzers.”

By unpacking how they measure alcohol, where they can fail, and how lawyers challenge their results, you’ll see why science is not necessarily as simple as a number on a printout.

October 19, 2025

State v. Rogers: Slow Death of the Exclusionary Rule in NC?

by Carolina Attorneys

TL;DR Quick Take: North Carolina v. Rogers could prove to be one of the most consequential constitutional rulings in North Carolina criminal law in decades. The opinion not only interprets N.C.G.S. § 15A-974 but also redefines how North Carolina courts understand the relationship between the Fourth Amendment and Article I, Section 20 of the North Carolina State Constitution.

As applied, the Good Faith Exception articulated in State v. Rogers reverses longstanding precedent set forth in North Carolina v. Carter.

The burden quietly shifts to the accused to demonstrate unreasonableness, reversing long-standing Due Process protections and draining both the fruit and the fiber from the “poisonous tree.”

October 18, 2025

Good Faith Exception to the Exclusionary Rule in North Carolina

by Carolina Attorneys

The Supreme Court of North Carolina’s opinion in North Carolina v. Rogers (Oct. 17, 2025) deserves careful study by criminal defense and DUI defense lawyers.

TL;DR Quick Take North Carolina v. Rogers reshapes how certain suppression motions may be litigated in North Carolina. The Supreme Court interpreted the 2011 “good faith” amendment to N.C.G.S. §15A-974 as significantly limiting the scope of the exclusionary rule, allowing evidence obtained through unlawful searches to be admitted if officers relied on objectively reasonable belief in the legality of their conduct. The decision narrows the path for defendants seeking suppression and marks a turning point in how trial courts evaluate Fourth Amendment violations.

Editor’s Note: The Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Rogers addressed good-faith reliance on a judicial order, not warrantless arrests or searches. The opinion leaves open whether the same reasoning will apply to warrantless seizures or probable-cause challenges. For now, Rogers appears to narrow the exclusionary rule only in the context of judicially authorized warrants and orders.

October 18, 2025

State v. Chemuti: Obtaining Video Evidence in North Carolina

by Carolina Attorneys

Accessing video evidence, body-cam, and dash-cam video in North Carolina potentially just became a lot harder to obtain.

TL;DR Quick Take: North Carolina v. Chemuti limits how defendants can access police body-worn and dash-camera recordings. The Supreme Court held that Rule 45 subpoenas cannot compel production of law-enforcement video. Instead, defendants must file a petition under N.C.G.S. § 132-1.4A in superior court, which is the exclusive procedure for release.

The Chemuti ruling is significant because, unlike many states, North Carolina provides no traditional right to discovery in cases originating in district court.

October 1, 2025

Breath, Blood, and Bull: Real Science from Junk in DUI Cases

by Carolina Attorneys

For more than three decades, I have worked in North Carolina courtrooms handling DUI cases where law, science, and technology collide. Few areas highlight that collision more than impaired driving prosecutions involving fatalities and serious injuries.

When an officer testifies about roadside tests or a LCA – Licensed Chemical Analyst explains “breathalyzer” machine results, the evidence is often presented with the weight of scientific certainty. But those of us who defend DWI charges know that level of certitude is sometimes a bit overstated.

The reality is that DUI cases are a perfect storm of pharmocokenetics, engineering, and criminal procedure.

August 6, 2025

DRE Testimony in North Carolina: Felony Death by Vehicle and Murder Trials

by Carolina Attorneys

DRE testimony has become a fixture in North Carolina’s most serious impaired driving cases, including felony death by vehicle and second-degree murder charges.

The Court of Appeals’ July 2025 opinion in North Carolina v. Moore provides essential guidance for lawyers, judges, and anyone facing charges based on drug impairment evidence. Understanding how DRE testimony is used, challenged, and scrutinized at trial can mean the difference between conviction and acquittal, and may shape plea negotiations and appellate strategy.

When legal charges involve both scientific analysis and complex courtroom questions, DRE testimony can have a significant impact on the outcome. At Powers Law Firm, clients facing felony death by vehicle, felony serious injury by vehicle, misdemeanor death by vehicle, and impaired driving charges trust our experience with serious criminal charges in Mecklenburg, Iredell, Union, Gaston, Lincoln, Rowan, and Stanly Counties. We review select cases across North Carolina. If your case hinges on technical or scientific evidence involving DRE testimony or allegations of drug impairment, please can TEXT or call 704-342-4357 to schedule a confidential consultation.

July 26, 2025

Intermittent Fasting and Drunk Driving Charges in North Carolina

by Carolina Attorneys

Intermittent fasting has gained popularity for a range of personal and medical reasons, from weight management and metabolic health to religious observance and athletic discipline. While it may offer certain physiological benefits, fasting also triggers changes in the body’s metabolic pathways that may complicate the interpretation of forensic alcohol testing in DWI cases.

This can become relevant in North Carolina, where the outcome of driving while impaired charges hinge on the reliability of breath or blood alcohol test results.

Defense attorneys, prosecutors, judges, and forensic experts are occasionally called to consider whether intermittent fasting affects the body’s internal chemistry and the resulting reported BAC.

April 30, 2025

Felony Death by Vehicle vs. Second-Degree Murder in North Carolina

by Carolina Attorneys

When a fatal collision occurs on North Carolina’s roads, the legal system doesn’t apply a one-size-fits-all response. In cases involving loss of life, prosecutors may consider a range of charges depending on the circumstances. Two of the most serious offenses are Felony Death by Vehicle and Second-Degree Murder.

While both carry the weight of a felony conviction and serious sentencing exposure, they are grounded in different legal theories and involve distinct statutory frameworks.

This article examines how these charges are defined under North Carolina law, what legal elements separate them, and why the difference matters—not just to lawyers and judges, but to anyone trying to understand how the state treats fatal driving cases.