N.C. Supreme Court

Supreme Court dives into execution case

ryanteaguebeckwith — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 11:30:54 -0500

The N.C. Supreme Court dove into the two-year stalemate in executions today by asking attorneys representing the state Department of Correction and the N.C. Medical Board to define what the state legislature meant in requiring that a doctor be present.

The debate over that word has created a de facto moratorium on executions in North Carolina. The correction department executes inmates on death row and is seeking to have a doctor take part in order to make sure the lethal injection is properly administered, Dan Kane reports.

That, the department contends, ensures that there has been no violation of Constitutional law against cruel and unusual punishment.

But the medical board contends that lawmakers only required doctors to attend to certify that an inmate was executed. Taking part in that execution, by monitoring an inmate's vital signs as correction officials want, would violate a doctor's basic mission to preserve life, the board has determined.

Several justices on the court peppered the attorneys with questions during the hour-long hearing.

More after the jump.

N.C. court to rule on executions

ryanteaguebeckwith — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 08:51:18 -0500

The N.C. Supreme Court will hear legal arguments today about capital punishment.

The case could break a two-year stalemate on executions in North Carolina or extend a de facto moratorium caused when docotrs refused to participate.

Under state law, a doctor must be on hand during an execution by lethal injection, but the N.C. Medical Board has prohibited doctors from taking part.

In March of 2007, the state Department of Correction filed a lawsuit, and state Superior Court Judge Donald Stephens sided with correction officials. The medical board has appealed.

A spokeswoman for Attorney General Roy Cooper, which is representing corrections officials, said the state Supreme Court could settle the matter. She said there is no federal question for U.S. courts to pursue.

The last execution took place on Aug. 18, 2006. (N&O)

Gay marriage court decision unlikely

ryanteaguebeckwith — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:06:36 -0500

North Carolina's courts are unlikely to legalize gay marriage.

Sharon Thompson, a Durham attorney specializing in cases involving gays and lesbians, said that there is little case law around the state constitution's equal protection provisions that could be used to argue for same-sex marriage.

State judges in California, Massachusetts and Connecticut have intrepreted provisions of those states' constitutions to affirm the rights of gays to marry.

Article I, Section 19 of North Carolina's constitution calls for "equal protection" of state laws, but Thompson said there have not been the kind of court decisions broadening that definition that would be necessary to build an opinion around.

"We don't have the stepping stones that would lead us to that," she said.

The N.C. Supreme Court, which would have the final say on any case based on the state constitution, currently has a 4-3 Republican majority, although state Appeals court judges have affirmed the custodial rights of gay partners in several recent cases.

Previously: N.C. likey to avoid gay marriage referendum

Why U.S. attorney post matters

ryanteaguebeckwith — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 09:37:09 -0500

Why does the U.S. attorney's post matter?

As we've written earlier, federal prosecutors in the Eastern District play a key role in corruption investigations because they have investigative powers that state prosecutors do not.

In addition, they are insulated from the local political forces that might hold back the state Attorney General's office or a locally elected prosecutor.

And after the Republican wipeout two weeks ago, the job will be even more important.

Other than prosecutors, the major checks on power in the state are legislators; the state auditor, governor, attorney general and other statewide elected officials; the state Supreme Court; the political parties; investigators for the State Board of Elections and the media.

Consider that Democrats now control both chambers of the legislature, hold eight out of 10 statewide offices including the governor, attorney general and the auditor, and an incoming U.S. senator in the majority party with ties to the state Senate leader.

Republicans have a 4-3 advantage on the state Supreme Court and one U.S. senator in the minority party. The state's party chairwoman is taking some criticism on blogs and may face a challenge next year. The only statewide officials are in labor and agriculture.

That leaves the board of elections, the U.S. attorney's office and the media as the major potential checks on corruption in the state.

Justice Mitchell on Stith

ryanteaguebeckwith — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 13:10:08 -0400

Another comment on N&O reporter Pat Stith's retirement.

"Pat has done more than any public official during the last 40 years to keep North Carolina goverment clean," said former NC. Supreme Court Chief Justice Burley Mitchell today.

Orr returns to constitutional group

ryanteaguebeckwith — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 12:07:50 -0400

Bob Orr is back at his old job.

The former Republican gubernatorial candidate has returned as executive director of the N.C. Institute for Constitutional Law.

After retiring from the state Supreme Court, Orr had served as the nonprofit group's first head, stepping down in May of last year to run for governor.

"My work on the Supreme Court and my recent experience as a candidate for governor strengthened my belief that promoting a greater emphasis on and appreciation for the N.C. Constitution, and the rights it affords and limitations it imposes on government, is a necessary and important objective," he said in a statement.

The institute focuses on public outreach and advocacy as well as litigation to argue that the state lottery and corporate incentives are unconstitutional.

Judicial pledge

ryanteaguebeckwith — Wed, 28 May 2008 10:00:43 -0400

Judicial pledge

A pledge for judicial candidates which says they will not politicize their races.
Download document

Anti-lottery group makes its case

bniolet — Mon, 19 May 2008 12:47:57 -0400

A group opposed to the lottery laid out its case today at the state Supreme Court.

The North Carolina Institute for Constitutional Law filed its brief today in its challenge to the lottery. The group says state lawmakers improperly established the lottery, Titan Barksdale reports.

In a split decision in March, the state Court of Appeals upheld a lower court's dismissal of the group's lawsuit that challenged the way North Carolina's lottery was established. The lawsuit, filed in 2005, contended that the lottery is a tax and didn't go through the procedural requirements in the legislature for new taxes.

The institute points to Judge Ann Marie Calabria's dissenting opinion to reinforce its argument. Her dissent gave the group a right to bring the case to the Supreme Court.

More after the jump.

Lake joins Shanahan Law Group

ryanteaguebeckwith — Wed, 14 May 2008 15:01:41 -0400

I. Beverly Lake Jr. has joined the Shanahan Law Group.

The former chief justice of the state Supreme Court will be a senior counsel at the Raleigh law firm, handling general corporate representation as well as litigation and appellate cases.

"Justice Lake is widely respected in legal, political and business circles throughout our state, and we are fortunate to have him on our team," said firm founder Kieran Shanahan.

A graduate of Wake Forest University's law school, Lake served two terms in the state Senate, ran for governor as the Republican nominee in 1980 and served on the Supreme Court from 1992 to 2006, when he was required to step down because of his age.

Edmunds reaches maximum

mtomsic — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 15:33:15 -0400

Bob Edmunds has received the maximum amount of contributions for publicly funded judicial candidates.

The candidate for the state Supreme Court is asking supporters to stop sending contributions.

As a participant in a publicly funded campaign, Edmunds raised the maximum $80,160 from more than 700 qualifying contributions.

Edmunds had to rasie a minimum of $40,050 from 350 registered North Carolina voters giving between $10 and $500 as a judicial candidate participating in the program.

"I am gratified that so many North Carolinians have chosen to support my reelection," Justice Edmunds said. "These contributions have come from citizens from all walks of life. However, it is awkward to return checks now that I have received the maximum amount. For that reason, I am asking that no additional contributions be sent."

Dome previously reported on April 8 that Edmunds' opponent, Suzanne Reynolds, reached her maximum for publicly funded judicial candidates.

Reynolds received nearly 450 qualifying contributions that totalled $80,100.

Both candidates are eligible for an additional $233,625 from the public campaign fund.