Articles Tagged with reasonable suspicion

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.

When can police officers conduct a patdown search, also known as a Terry frisk? The North Carolina Court of Appeals addressed this When-Can-Police-Officers-Conduct-a-Patdown-Search question in State v. Rowdy, providing insight into the balance between individual rights and law enforcement’s need to protect their personal safety.

If you’re facing criminal charges, it’s helpful to understand the key aspects of patdown searches, including what they are, and when a “frisk” may be justified.

In this post, we discuss the legal principles at play, such as reasonable suspicion and the scope of a search, and examine how officer training and experience may factor into the equation.

Shawn Patrick Ellis created quite a kerfuffle in more ways than one.REASONABLE SUSPICION IN NORTH CAROLINA

His defiant middle finger and later refusal to identify himself to law enforcement resulted in a Superior Court criminal conviction for Resisting Officers.

On a day focused on NC court closures, continuances, and the Coronavirus, Justice Robin Hudson delivered an opinion addressing the legality of giving someone the middle finger.

Do-You-Consent-to-a-Sniff-Search

By Driving a Car in North Carolina, Do You Consent to a Sniff Search?  Is a Sniff even a Search?  Does the law differ between Vehicles and Persons?

Caselaw Summary For North Carolina v. Warren 

North Carolina Court of Appeals – Publication Date August 4, 2015

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFWU702u-w8

Modified Transcript of “Reasonable Suspicion To Stop” for Hearing Impaired:

. . .By a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the person seized is engaged in criminal activity.

Contact Information