NAACP focuses on police shooting

HENDERSONVILLE (AP) — North Carolina’s NAACP is calling attention to complaints of police gunfire that led to one Hendersonville police officer being fired and another suspended for two weeks without pay.

The civil rights organization planned a news conference today near where stray police bullets hit several homes and a church in March.

Police Chief Herbert Blake said last month the officers will not be charged in connection with the shooting of a fleeing burglary suspect. The district attorney says the officers did nothing criminal and won’t face charges.

The NAACP says it wants local, state, and federal investigations into the shooting and for local police to make clear how they’ll prevent similar shootings in the future.

Most Important Opinions

Real Property – Contract – Materialman’s Lien – Subsequent Purchaser – Mortgages – Unjust Enrichment (access required)

John Conner Construction, Inc. v. Grandfather Holding Co. Where the majority opinion in our Court of Appeals held, Where the plaintiff-contractors started working on the land at issue for defendant Grandfather Holding Co. before Grandfather Holding even entered into formal negotiations to buy the land, the contractors had no statutory right to file a claim of lien on the property, the ruling stands without precedential value

Criminal Practice – Search & Seizure – Defendant’s Residence — Protective Sweep – Weapon (access required)

State v. Dial Even if Deputy Burger’s testimony about prior arrests at defendant’s home only included one felony drug arrest, the trial court’s finding that Burger “had dealt with defendant on other occasions as well, including making felony drug arrests at the residence” was not prejudicial

Workers’ Compensation – Change of Condition – Insufficient Showing – Doctor’s Testimony (access required)

Wilhite v. Pike Electric, Inc. Although plaintiff’s doctor agreed with plaintiff’s counsel’s assertion that plaintiff was “100 percent” disabled, the doctor’s opinion on this point was not based solely upon plaintiff’s medical condition – which the doctor said was unchanged – or on the doctor’s medical expertise; rather, the doctor agreed with counsel’s assessment based on the doctor’s consideration of plaintiff’s “skill set and educational background.”