By North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff
Published: July 11,2012
State v. Harwood An anonymous tip – that defendant would be selling marijuana at a certain location on a certain day and would be driving a white vehicle – wasn’t detailed enough to justify defendant’s seizure.
By North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff
Published: February 23,2012
State v. Hemphill When Officer Adkins arrived at Auto America, he saw defendant, who generally matched the description of one of the individuals reported by an anonymous caller, peering from behind a van parked at Auto America. When defendant spotted Officer Adkins, defendant ran away from him. Defendant ignored Officer Adkins when he shouted for defendant to stop, and Officer Adkins ran after defendant for about an eighth of a mile. When Officer Adkins caught up with defendant, defendant was attempting to hide behind a dumpster. When considered together and in context, these facts were sufficient to raise a reasonable suspicion that criminal activity was afoot, and that defendant was involved.
By North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff
Published: August 19,2011
U.S. v. Massenburg Police officers responding to an anonymous tip about “shots fired” in a high-crime neighborhood, who saw four young men several blocks from the reported gunfire, did not have reasonable, particularized suspicion to conduct a pat-down of one of the young men who appeared nervous and refused consent to search; the 4th Circuit reverses defendant’s conviction on marijuana and firearm charges.
NC Lawyers Weekly keeps you connected with the latest legal news, Daily Practice and Breaking
News alerts.
Sign up for NC Lawyers Weekly email alerts
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.”
Huff v. CBS Quality Cars, Inc. Since the trial court found that plaintiff signed the bill of sale and ratified the financing contract by accepting the car, driving it, and making payments on it for several months, the court was not required to make a finding of fact regarding whether plaintiff’s signature on the financing contract had been forged.
U.S. v. Hasan The sale of untaxed cigarettes by government agents during a two-year investigation of trafficking in contraband cigarettes was not so “outrageous” and “shocking” as to violate defendant’s right to due process, and the 4th Circuit affirms his convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 371 and § 2342(a).
