Criminal Practice – Sufficiency of Indictment – Common Law Obstruction of Justice – Motion to Dismiss

Indictments were fatally defective as they failed to state an essential and necessary element of the offense of common law obstruction of justice.

We vacated the trial court’s judgments.

Defendant, who was a deputy sheriff in North Carolina for over two decades, appealed from judgments rendered pursuant to jury verdicts finding defendant guilty of 12 counts of felony obstruction of justice. The dispositive issues before us were whether obstruction of justice is a cognizable common law offense in North Carolina and whether the indictments in this case were sufficient to allege common law obstruction of justice.

Our courts have consistently recognized common law obstruction of justice as a cognizable offense. Our Supreme Court has even expressed that the existence of statutory forms of obstruction of justice did not serve to abrogate the common law offense. Therefore, common law obstruction of justice is a cognizable offense in North Carolina.

Defendant further argued the court erred by denying his motion to dismiss the indictments because they failed to allege facts supporting the elements of obstruction of justice. Defendant contended, among other things, that while the indictments allege defendant committed “the infamous offense of obstruction of justice” they do not allege facts to support the element that defendant acted to obstruct justice. The State contends this is “a mere semantic complaint[.]” The State argued there is no material difference between the essential element of the offense and the description of the alleged misconduct in the indictment.

The indictments alleged defendant willfully and knowingly provided false and misleading information in training records knowing those records would be submitted to the North Carolina Sheriffs’ Education and Training Standards Division for the purpose of allowing Sheriff Wilkins and Chief Deputy Boyd to maintain their law enforcement certification. While these alleged actions are wrongful, there are no facts asserted in the indictment to support the assertion defendant’s actions were done to subvert a potential subsequent investigation or legal proceeding. For example, there was no indication in the indictment that defendant acted purposely to hinder any investigation by the Education and Training Standards Division or to attempt to impair their ability to seek any injunctive relief against Sheriff Wilkins or Chief Deputy Boyd under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 17C-11(c). To the contrary, the indictments assert defendant’s acts were allegedly done for the sole purpose of allowing his supervisors to maintain their certifications.

As such, the indictments failed to allege facts supporting an element of the offense: that defendant obstructed justice defined as an act obstructing, impeding or hindering public or legal justice. As a result, the indictments were insufficient by failing to state an essential and necessary element of the offense of common law obstruction of justice. Therefore, the indictments were fatally defective. Consequently, the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictments.

Vacated.

State v. Coffey (Lawyers’ Weekly No. 011-037-24, 15 pp.) (Tobias Hampson, J.) Appealed from Wake County Superior Court (R. Allen Baddour Jr., J.) Attorney General Joshua H. Stein, by Assistant Attorney General Caden W. Hayes, for the State; Cheshire Parker Schneider, PLLC, by Elliot S. Abrams, for defendant-appellant; Samuel J. Davis, Daniel K. Siegel and Kristi L. Graunke, for amicus curiae American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina Legal Foundation; Essex Richards, P.A., by Norris A. Adams, II, for amicus curiae North Carolina Fraternal Order of Police. North Carolina Court of Appeals