Carolina Criminal Defense & DUI Lawyer UpdatesQUICK ANSWER: In North Carolina, marijuana possession remains illegal under NCGS § 90-94, regardless of changing attitudes in other states. Charlotte courtrooms now explicitly ban marijuana odor with posted signs. While the smell itself isn’t a crime, appearing in court smelling like marijuana can damage your credibility, affect sentencing decisions, and signal disrespect to judges, potentially worsening case outcomes before you say a word.
Articles Tagged with Powers Law Firm Charlotte
When the State Profits from Crime: Taxing Crime in North Carolina
North Carolina law prohibits the possession, sale, and trafficking of controlled substances. Yet the same State that prosecutes those 
offenses also taxes and therefore profits them. Is that right? Does that make sense? Should the government profit from crime? Is it OK to tax Drugs? Extortion? What about Illegal Pornography, Prostitution and Human Trafficking? Where do we, the governed, draw the line?
The Controlled Substance Tax, codified at N.C.G.S. § 105-113.105, operates on the premise that illegal drugs have taxable value even though their sale and possession are criminal acts. The idea that “income is income” regardless of source smacks of Machiavelli and a willingness to bend basic moral imperatives. Beneath that procedural logic lies a troubling contradiction, if not outright hypocrisy.
Questions about punishment, profit, and fairness aren’t theoretical when you are the one standing before the court. North Carolina law distinguishes between fines, forfeiture, and taxation, but for clients facing criminal charges, those differences often feel academic. Bill Powers and the Powers Law Firm handle serious criminal matters in Mecklenburg, Union, Iredell, Gaston, Rowan, and Lincoln Counties, examining how the law operates in real courtrooms, not just in theory. Bill Powers is a widely regarded North Carolina criminal defense attorney, educator, and legal commentator with more than thirty-three years of courtroom and trial experience. He is recognized throughout the state for his work on impaired driving, criminal law, and legal education, and is a recipient of the North Carolina State Bar Distinguished Service Award. For select legal matters, Bill Powers consults on a statewide basis. To discuss your case in confidence, TEXT or call 704-342-4357.
Civil Warrants, Criminal Searches: Fourth Amendment in North Carolina
The North Carolina Court of Appeals’ decision in State v. Hickman (COA24-893, filed November 5, 2025) revisits a foundational 
question in constitutional law. When government agents enter private property without a warrant, what happens to the evidence they obtain?
While the case involves a Department of Revenue tax warrant rather than a traditional criminal investigation, its implications extend beyond tax collection. It clarifies the continuing role of the Fourth Amendment and Article I, Section 20 of the North Carolina Constitution in protecting private dwellings from unauthorized searches and seizures.
The opinion also reaffirms an older, quieter truth that sometimes gets lost in modern exclusionary-rule debate.
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.
The Future of the Exclusionary Rule in North Carolina
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.
Knock and Talk or Search by Another Name?
If a “knock and talk” crosses the constitutional line, can what officers saw or learned still justify 
a search warrant?
TL;DR Quick Take: North Carolina v. Norman tests the limits of North Carolina’s knock and talk doctrine and asks whether a search warrant can survive when officers use observations gathered during a questionable encounter on private property.
The decision turns on three interrelated questions:
State v. Rogers: Slow Death of the Exclusionary Rule in NC?
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.”
Good Faith Exception to the Exclusionary Rule in North Carolina
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.
State v. Chemuti: Obtaining Video Evidence in North Carolina
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.
Ketogenic Fasting Alcohol Effects on BAC and DWI Charges
Can Ketogenic Fasting Affect Your DWI Charges in North Carolina?
If you’re following ketogenic fasting, characterized by prolonged calorie and carbohydrate restriction, you may be unknowingly altering your body’s response to alcohol and potentially impacting DUI test results and associated criminal allegations of “drunk 
driving.”
While ketogenic fasting triggers autophagy, a natural cellular cleanup, it also indirectly influences glucose and cortisol levels, creating complex physiological interactions potentially relevant to impaired driving charges.