Carolina Criminal Defense & DUI Lawyer UpdatesHouse Bill 307, known as Iryna’s Law, took effect December 1, 2025, and represents perhaps the most significant statutory reform to North Carolina’s pretrial release framework in decades.
The legislation emerged in response to a high-profile homicide in Charlotte and puts into effect sweeping changes to bail procedures, pretrial detention authority, and judicial oversight of release decisions.
The law’s core mechanism is the creation of rebuttable presumptions against the release of defendants charged with specified violent offenses or who have prior violent-offense records. Presumptions shift the baseline inquiry from “why should this defendant be detained,” to “why should this defendant be released despite the statutory presumption.”
Under N.C.G.S. 15A-531(9), a “violent offense” includes any Class A through G felony that has assault, the use of physical force, or the threat of physical force as an essential element. The affected offense categories include things like:
- First-degree murder, second-degree murder, and voluntary manslaughter
- Certain sexual offenses, including first-degree rape and sexual offense
- Robbery with a dangerous weapon and first-degree burglary
- Assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury
- Discharging a firearm into an occupied property causing serious injury
- Defendants with prior convictions for enumerated violent offenses within specified lookback periods
Under G.S. 15A-534(b1), the law creates a presumption that no condition of release will reasonably assure safety/appearance. Therefore, the judicial official must presume that pretrial detention is appropriate
TL;DR Iryna’s Law, effective December 1, 2025, fundamentally shifts the procedural burden in North Carolina pretrial release hearings for specified violent offenses. The legislation moves away from the traditional presumption of release on the least restrictive conditions to a rebuttable presumption against pretrial release. Under this framework, the baseline inquiry is no longer whether the State can justify detention, but whether the defendant can present credible evidence to overcome a statutory presumption that detention is required. This shift necessitates a transition from informal bond arguments to substantive, evidence-driven proceedings where the defense must proactively demonstrate that release conditions can sufficiently mitigate risks to public safety and judicial process.
Bill Powers, recipient of the North Carolina State Bar John B. McMillan Distinguished Service Award and former president of the North Carolina Advocates for Justice, represents clients throughout the Charlotte-Metro region and is available for consultation across North Carolina on serious criminal charges including vehicular homicide, felony death by vehicle, felony serious injury by vehicle, misdemeanor death by vehicle, involuntary manslaughter, and DUI charges in Iredell, Union, and Gaston County. If you have questions about how Iryna’s Law may affect your case, contact Powers Law Firm at 704-342-4357.
| Scenario | Requirement |
| Charged with a Violent Offense | Rebuttable presumption against release applies. |
| Second/Subsequent Violent Offense | If the defendant was already on pretrial release for a violent offense, the court must impose house arrest with GPS monitoring if release is granted. |
| Prior Criminal History (10-Year Lookback) | If a defendant has 3 or more convictions (Class 1 misdemeanor or higher) within the prior 10 years, they are ineligible for a written promise to appear or unsecured bond. They must receive a secured bond or house arrest. |
The Rebuttable Presumption Against Release|How Iryna’s Law Bond Hearings Work
The presumption framework fundamentally alters bond advocacy in North Carolina. Under prior law, the default starting point was release on conditions tailored to ensure appearance and protect the community. Detention was the exception, requiring specific findings by the Court (judicial official).
When a defendant is charged with one of the enumerated offenses or has the specified, prerequisite criminal history, the judicial official must presume that pretrial detention is appropriate unless the defendant rebuts that presumption with credible evidence.
Under Iryna’s Law, detention is now the norm for certain classes of offenses and types of criminal defendants. Moreover, the defendant now bears the burden of presenting evidence sufficient to overcome the presumption.
That evidence must necessarily address statutory factors, including the:
- Nature and circumstances of the offense
- The weight of evidence against the defendant
- The defendant’s prior criminal record and history of court appearances
- The defendant’s ties to the community, including family, employment, and residence
- The risk of flight or danger to the community
- Any other factors relevant by the Court to the release decision
Judges are now required to make written findings when granting release in presumption cases, documenting the basis for overriding the statutory presumption. That requirement will obviously create institutional pressure toward detention, given the substantial scrutiny in the court of public perception and potential appellate review.
Strategic Implications | Setting Bond & Conditions for Release
As such, Iryna’s Law now converts bond hearings for certain enumerated cases from informal arguments into evidentiary proceedings requiring verified mitigation evidence.
Defense counsel is charged with the burden of gathering evidence supporting release before the first bond hearing and well before discovery is provided. That may include things like:
- Verified residence information (lease agreements, property records, utility bills, letters from landlords or family confirming the defendant’s living situation)
- Employment verification (employer letters, pay stubs, work schedules, employer willingness to continue employment during pretrial release)
- Family ties (letters from family members, evidence of childcare responsibilities, medical or caregiving obligations)
- Treatment or supervision proposals (letters from counselors, treatment programs, or supervision agencies willing to accept the defendant); community support (letters from community organizations, religious institutions, or other support systems)
- Evidence addressing the alleged offense (witness statements, alibi evidence, or other material casting doubt on the State’s case).
Generic assertions by counsel that “my client has ties to the community” or “my client is not a flight risk” likely will not overcome the statutory presumption. Courts may very well expect concrete, verifiable evidence supporting each assertion.
Under G.S. 15A-534(d), if a judicial official authorizes release for a covered defendant, they must issue an order containing written findings of fact explaining why the conditions are appropriate.
When pretrial detention appears likely, defense counsel should be prepared to present structured risk-mitigation plans that address the court’s specific concerns including electronic monitoring or GPS tracking, supervised release through pretrial services or private supervision vendors, no-contact orders or geographic restrictions addressing victim safety; substance abuse monitoring or treatment conditions, surrender of firearms or other conditions tailored to the alleged offense, and third-party custodian arrangements where family or community members assume responsibility for monitoring the defendant.
Well-organized proposals may demonstrate that release can be granted safely with appropriate conditions, rather than requiring detention to protect the community or ensure appearance.
One statutory factor courts must consider is the weight of evidence against the defendant. In appropriate circumstances, thay may create an opportunity for defense counsel to present evidence that the State’s case is weaker than initial charges suggest, or that the defendant has substantial defenses. Obviously, without formal discovery, that can be a difficult proposition.
Clearly, such bond hearings are not intended to be an adjudication on the merits of the case. As such, they do not require a full pretrial adjudication of guilt or innocence. But in cases where evidence is available (alibi witnesses, exculpatory video, medical records contradicting the State’s theory), presenting that evidence at the bond hearing may influence the Court’s assessment of whether the defendant poses the risks the presumption assumes.
Iryna’s Law does not change statutory timelines for initial appearances or bond hearings, but the practical availability of judicial review varies significantly by jurisdiction. In high-volume urban counties like Mecklenburg County, defendants may wait weeks, if not months, for a bond hearing before a judge with authority to consider the specifics of the case at hand.
During that waiting period, the defendant remains detained, investigation becomes more difficult, employment may be lost, and family disruption obviously takes place.
Collateral Consequences of Pretrial Detention
The strategic importance of Iryna’s Law may extend well beyond the immediate question of liberty and the presumption of innocence. Pretrial detention creates cascading consequences that can easily affect case outcomes.
Defendants who remain detained pending trial face pressure to resolve cases quickly, even through unfavorable plea agreements, to end incarceration. Prosecutors understand this leverage and may calibrate plea offers accordingly. Defendants released pretrial retain greater capacity to reject unfavorable offers and proceed to trial.
Detained defendants experience substantial difficulty assisting in their own defense through witness location, document gathering, or crime scene investigation. Defense investigators working alone may also face greater difficulty developing exculpatory evidence when the defendant cannot participate in the investigation in a meaningful way.
Frequently Asked Questions About Iryna’s Law and Pretrial Release in North Carolina
Iryna’s Law applies to defendants charged with first-degree murder, second-degree murder, voluntary manslaughter, certain sexual offenses (including first-degree rape and sexual offense), robbery with a dangerous weapon, first-degree burglary, assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury, and discharging a firearm into occupied property causing serious injury. The presumption also applies to defendants with prior convictions for enumerated violent offenses within specified lookback periods. What offenses trigger the rebuttable presumption against release under Iryna's Law?
To rebut the presumption created by Iryna’s Law in North Carolina, it’s necessary to submit credible, verified evidence addressing statutory factors including the nature and circumstances of the offense, the weight of evidence, prior criminal record and court appearance history, ties to the community (family, employment, residence), and the risk of flight or danger to the community. Generic assertions are generally insufficient. Courts may expect concrete documentation such as lease agreements, employer letters, pay stubs, family support letters, and structured risk-mitigation proposals. What evidence is needed to overcome the presumption and get released on bond?
Iryna’s Law does not change statutory timelines for initial appearances or bond hearings, but practical availability varies by jurisdiction. Defendants receive an initial bond hearing in District Court. However, in high-volume urban counties like Mecklenburg County, cases are often indicted quickly, moving them to Superior Court. Indicted defendants may wait weeks or even months for a bond hearing in Superior Court before a judge with authority to consider the specifics of the case. During this waiting period, defendants remain detained. How long does it take to get a bond hearing under Iryna's Law?
If a defendant has three or more convictions (Class 1 misdemeanor or higher) within the prior 10 years, they are ineligible for a written promise to appear or unsecured bond under Iryna’s Law. The Court must Order a secured bond or house arrest. Additionally, if a defendant is charged with a second or subsequent violent offense while already on pretrial release for a violent offense, the Court must impose house arrest with GPS monitoring if release is granted. Under Iryna's Law in North Carolina, can a defendant be released on an unsecured bond or written promise to appear?
Pretrial detention creates significant consequences beyond loss of liberty. Detained defendants face pressure to accept unfavorable plea agreements to end incarceration. They may lose employment, experience family disruption, and have difficulty assisting in their own defense through witness location, document gathering, or crime scene investigation. Prosecutors understand this leverage and may adjust plea offers accordingly. What happens if a defendant remains detained before trial under Iryna's Law?
Defending Against Pretrial Detention Under Iryna’s Law in North Carolina
Iryna’s Law represents a fundamental transformation of pretrial procedure in North Carolina. The rebuttable presumption against release for violent offenses has converted bond hearings from routine procedural matters into critical evidentiary proceedings that deserve some level of strategic preparation. Defense counsel are called to gather verified documentation, develop comprehensive risk-mitigation proposals, and present compelling evidence to overcome statutory presumptions, often without the benefit of formal discovery or adequate time for investigation.
The stakes extend beyond immediate release from custody. Pretrial detention often affects multiple aspects of case preparation, from witness interviews to plea negotiations. Defendants who remain incarcerated face mounting pressure to resolve cases quickly, losing both the practical ability to assist in their own defense and the leverage to reject unfavorable plea offers. In this new procedural pretrial release landscape, the initial bond hearing can determine not only whether the accused defendant secures release, but whether they retain the capacity to mount an effective defense at trial.
Bill Powers is a recipient of the North Carolina State Bar John B. McMillan Distinguished Service Award and former president of the North Carolina Advocates for Justice. He brings substantial courtroom experience to complex criminal matters. Bill’s practice includes cases involving vehicular homicide, felony death by vehicle, felony serious injury by vehicle, misdemeanor death by vehicle, involuntary manslaughter, and DUI charges in Iredell, Union, and Gaston counties. If someone you care about is facing criminal charges, is in custody, and possibly subject to Iryna’s Law, contact Powers Law Firm at 704-342-4357 for a consultation.