Eric L. Levinson

The case involved Joseph Lamar Stokley, who was convicted by a jury of trafficking in cocaine by possession, possession with intent to sell and deliver cocaine, and maintaining a dwelling for keeping and selling controlled substances based on evidence seized from his home during execution of a search warrant. The trial court denied his pretrial motions to suppress the evidence for lack of probable cause and to disclose the identity of a confidential informant who had made a controlled buy from him. On appeal, the court found no error, holding that the warrant application was supported by probable cause from police surveillance of drug activity and the controlled purchase, and that disclosure of the informant was not required because the informant was not present during the search and the defendant failed to show a need for the identity. The court also rejected related claims regarding the informant's potential testimony and other evidentiary issues.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a workers' compensation claim by Kevin Greene against Conlon Construction Company and its insurer after Greene suffered a back and leg injury while working on a construction project in Georgia. Greene had been hired from North Carolina, received a fixed weekly per diem allowance for out-of-town work, and initially filed in Georgia before seeking benefits through the North Carolina Industrial Commission, which awarded medical and disability payments that included the per diem in his average weekly wage calculation. The defendants appealed, arguing the per diem should not be counted as wages. The North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed the Commission's decision, holding that under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-2(5) the allowance qualified as paid in lieu of wages because it was a fixed sum provided regardless of actual expenses and at the employee's discretion, supported by competent evidence in the record.

labor & employmentprocedure

The case involved Ruben Wright, Jr.'s conviction for the first-degree murder of James Taulbee, whose wife Zene was having an affair with the defendant. The prosecution presented evidence including phone records linking Wright to Zene, witness observations, and Wright's own statements to officers admitting he reloaded the gun used in the shooting while claiming Zene fired it. Wright appealed, arguing that statements he made while detained in a military brig should have been suppressed because he was not given Miranda warnings during one interview. The Court of Appeals of North Carolina affirmed the conviction, holding that Wright was not in custody for Miranda purposes during the brig interview since he was not formally arrested, was free to leave the room, and had been advised of his rights in prior interviews. A concurring opinion noted that any potential error would have been harmless given the earlier Miranda warnings.

criminal lawprocedure

The case was a medical malpractice action brought by a mother and her profoundly disabled child against a hospital, its residency program, and various physicians and staff, alleging that negligence during labor and delivery caused the child's cerebral palsy and related injuries. After a multi-week trial, the trial court entered judgment for the defendants with costs taxed against the plaintiffs. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, finding no error in the trial court's questioning of witnesses to clarify complex medical issues or in the overall conduct of the trial, but reversed in part the costs award because certain expert witness fees and other expenses were not recoverable under North Carolina law.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case involved the State appealing a trial court's suppression of evidence, including crack cocaine, firearms, and cash, found during execution of a search warrant at the defendant's mobile home. Officers had obtained the warrant based on controlled buys by confidential informants, knocked and announced at the front door, waited about five seconds without response, and then forced entry with a battering ram before securing the premises and conducting the search. The trial court concluded that the forced entry violated the Fourth Amendment and constituted a substantial violation of North Carolina's knock-and-announce statute (N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-251) because there was no evidence justifying the brief wait or forced entry. The Court of Appeals reversed, reasoning that the evidence was discovered during the later search under a valid warrant rather than as a direct result of the improper entry, so the statutory and constitutional violations did not require suppression under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-974.

criminal lawprocedurecivil rights

In Wilson v. Wilson, an attorney appealed a trial court order that struck her notice of charging lien for unpaid fees in an equitable distribution case and imposed Rule 11 sanctions against her while denying her cross-motion for sanctions. The attorney had filed the lien notice after her client terminated her representation but before entry of the final judgment. The court held that the filing violated the legal sufficiency requirement of Rule 11 because no final judgment existed against which a charging lien could attach, and the client's motion sought appropriate relief even if citing incorrect rules. It therefore affirmed the sanctions award covering the client's attorney fees and the denial of sanctions against the client.

procedurefamily law