State v. J.A. – First Degree Rape
Last year, North Carolina became only the second state in the country to pass a law recognizing that racial biases may come into play in death penalty cases and allowing those sentenced to death to contest their sentences on racial bias grounds.
Under the historic and controversial Racial Justice Act, North Carolina death row inmates can petition the court to hold a hearing to review their death penalty sentences if they can prove that race was a substantial factor in decisions to seek or impose the death penalty in the county, prosecutorial district, judicial division or the state at the time of the defendant’s sentence.
The Racial Justice Act also applies to those who are facing death penalty sentences. In these cases, the criminal defendant can request a pre-trial hearing to try to prove that racial bias is a substantial factor in the state seeking the death penalty against him or her.
If the petitioner can successfully show that racial bias was a substantial factor in the prosecutor seeking the death penalty or the court imposing capital punishment, then the court must vacate the sentence and replace it with a sentence of life without parole.
The Act specifies the types of evidence that can be used to prove racial bias was a substantial factor in the death sentence, which includes statistical evidence and sworn statements from police officers, attorneys, prosecutors, jurors, and other members of the criminal justice system that at least one of the following applies to their case:
One of the most controversial sections of the Racial Justice Act is the provision allowing death row inmates and criminal defendants to challenge the death penalty based on statistical evidence of racial bias. State prosecutors have cried foul over this part of the Act and argued that statistics can be manipulated to make racial bias appear to exist where it does not.
Two recent statistical studies, in particular, have been cited as evidence of racial bias by several of the 152 North Carolina death row inmates currently challenging their sentences under the Act.
One study conducted by Michigan State University College of Law found that when the victim was white, criminal defendants in North Carolina have nearly a three times greater chance of getting the death penalty, regardless of the defendant’s race. The Michigan State study looked at more than 1500 cases between 1990 and 2009.
A second study took a closer look at the cases of the 159 inmates currently on death row in North Carolina and found that the prosecutors in these cases had removed blacks from the jury pool at more than twice the rate of any other race. Of the 159 death row inmates, 31 of them were sentenced by all-white juries.
Getting the Racial Justice Act passed was no easy feat in North Carolina. Republican members of the state legislature, by and large, were against the Act, with some commenting that it only allowed criminal defendants to postpone their sentences. State prosecutors also rallied against the law. The Director of the North Carolina Conference of District Attorneys said she was “very confident” that race had not played a role in imposing the death penalty in the state.
Regardless of the staunch opposition to the Act, it was signed into law by Governor Bev Purdue on August 10, 2009. After signing the historic legislation, the Governor said in a news release, “I have always been a supporter of the death penalty, but I have always believed it must be carried out fairly. The Racial Justice Act ensures that when North Carolina hands down our state’s harshest punishment to our most heinous criminals – the decision is based on the facts and the law, not racial prejudice.”
The passage of the Racial Justice Act is just one of the more recent actions taken against the death penalty in North Carolina. Execution of death row inmates has been on hold the last three years, pending the outcome of a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the death penalty and alleging that death by lethal injection constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. There also has been a move in the state to prohibit physicians from participating in carrying out the death penalty.
For more information on challenging a death penalty sentence under the Racial Justice Act, contact a criminal defense attorney today. While the deadline for those already sentenced to the death penalty to challenge their sentences under the Act passed on August 10, those who are currently facing charges for a capital offense still can challenge the death penalty under the Act.
State v. B.S.: Not Guilty Verdict in First Degree Murder Case.
In this case, our client was charged with First Degree Murder in connection with a “drive-by” shooting that occurred in Charlotte, NC. The State’s evidence included GPS ankle monitoring data linking our client was at the scene of the crime and evidence that our client confessed to an inmate while in jail. Nonetheless, we convinced a jury to unanimously find our client Not Guilty. He was released from jail the same day.
State v. S.G.: First Degree Murder Charge Dismissed.
Our client was charged with First Degree for the shooting death related to alleged breaking and entering. The State’s evidence included a co-defendant alleging that our client was the shooter. After conducting a thorough investigation with the use of a private investigator, we persuaded the State to dismiss entirely the case against our client.
State v. B.D.: First Degree Murder Charged Dismissed.
After conducting an investigation and communicating with the prosecutor about the facts and circumstances indicating that our client acted in self-defense, the case was dismissed and deemed a justifiable homicide.
State v. I.R.: Reduction from First Degree Murder to Involuntary Manslaughter and Concealment of Death.
Our client was charged with the First Degree Murder of a young lady by drug overdose. After investigating the decedent’s background and hiring a preeminent expert toxicologist to fight the State’s theory of death, we were able to negotiate this case down from Life in prison to 5 years in prison, with credit for time served.
State v. J.G.:
Our client was charged with First Degree Murder related to a “drug deal gone bad.” After engaging the services of a private investigator and noting issues with the State’s case, we were able to negotiate a plea for our client that avoided a Life sentence and required him to serve only 12 years.
State v. J.A. – First Degree Rape
State v. B.S. – First Degree Murder
State v. E.D. – Identity Theft
State v. J.A. – First Degree Rape
Each case is different and must be evaluated on its individual facts. We work hard to assess each case individually. Prior results do not guarantee any future outcome.
Fields marked with an * are required
Call 877-270-5081 to schedule a free initial consultation. Offices open weekdays 8am – 7pm, Saturdays 9am – 5pm
*AV®, AV Preeminent®, Martindale-Hubbell Distinguished and Martindale-Hubbell Notable are certification marks used under license in accordance with the Martindale-Hubbell certification procedures, standards and policies. Martindale-Hubbell® is the facilitator of a peer review rating process. Ratings reflect the anonymous opinions of members of the bar and the judiciary. Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ fall into two categories — legal ability and general ethical standards.
© 2022 Roberts Law Group, PLLC. All Rights Reserved.