Charlotte Criminal Lawyer Blog

North Carolina Protestors Charged with Burning Flag

Published on: January 4, 2012 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Four men have been charged with careless use of fire after a flag burning incident during an Occupy Charlotte protest. According to the Charlotte Observer, two American flags were burned outside of the campsite in protest of what the protestors labeled “American greed.”

Police say that the suspects were charged because they failed to use a fire pit to burn the flags. Those arrested were 19-year-old Alex Tyler, 20-year-old Stephen Morris, 23-year-old Michael Behrle, and 28-year-old Jason Bargert. Bargert, was acting as the spokesperson for the Occupy Charlotte movement.

Tyler said that the purpose of the flag burning was to send sparks through the camp. “I’ve seen this group lose its activism and become lazy,” said Tyler, adding that the other men told him, “We’re going to give Occupy Charlotte a wake-up call.” Well, the protestors got their wish. The movement is now divided over the incident. Several members thought that burning the flag was unnecessary and disrespectful and at least 10 members of the movement have issued formal statements disassociating themselves from the flag-burning episode. There was even some debate about expelling the men from the group. As of yet, there has been no word of whether the four protestors are still a part of the Occupy Charlotte movement.

Occupy Charlotte is part of the nationwide Occupy movement that began with Occupy Wall Street in September. According to Occupy Wall Street’s official website, the purpose of the movement is to protest against banks and corporations that they believe have led to the economic collapse of the nation. Occupy Wall Street has led to several similar occupy movements across the country, including Occupy Charlotte. Occupy Charlotte is following in the footsteps of the pioneers on Wall Street.

Gun Permits for Felons in North Carolina on the Rise

Published on: December 29, 2011 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Post #2 criminal image.jpg The Charlotte Observer recently published a report by the New York Times about the rise in the number of concealed carry permits. The report recounts an incident where an Asheville, North Carolina man had a hair-raising experience with the driver of an SUV.

Alan Simmons and his family were riding bicycles down the road when they were approached by a driver in an SUV. The driver was visibly upset with Simmons because he was riding his bike in the street. Simmons stopped and so did the driver. The two got into a verbal altercation, but the driver of the SUV, Charles Diez, pulled out a gun and threatened to shoot Simmons. When Simmons turned to leave, Diez fired, but the bullet passed through his helmet barely missing his head.

Diez was legally allowed to carry that weapon. He was licensed to carry a concealed weapon and Simmons believes that that is the reason why a verbal altercation nearly turned deadly. Diez was eventually arrested and he pled guilty to assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill. The problem is not with the number of permits that are now being allowed across the country. The problem is the ease with which one can obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon. North Carolina is one of many states that only requires a simple background check before allowing someone to obtain a concealed carry permit.

In addition to the ease of obtaining the permit, gun advocates are seeking to increase the places where guns are allowed. In the recent past, guns have been taken off of the banned list for bars, houses of worship, and college campuses. The argument in favor of increasing the presence of guns in public places is that gun owners should be allowed to protect themselves when they are out and about.

“These are people who have proven themselves to be among the most responsible and safe members of our community,” said Rep. Cliff Stearns of Florida. Rep. Stearns wrote a bill that would require states to recognize other state’s gun permits, extending the Full Faith and Credit Clause to gun permits. The House has already approved the bill and the Senate is expected to consider it next year.

The New York Times conducted an investigation into North Carolina’s concealed weapons permit holders. The investigation revealed that several of North Carolina’s permit holders had been convicted of felonies or misdemeanors. In several of these cases, the state did not pull the gun permit from those convicted.

Charlotte Murder-Suicide Prompts Investigation

Published on: December 27, 2011 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Post #1 criminal image.png According to a recent report by WCNC, Charlotte-Mecklenburg police are investigating a murder-suicide that happened earlier in the month. Police were called to the home of 32-year-old Stephanie Ott to assist the fire department with a forced entry into the home. When the policemen and firefighters successfully entered to the home, they found Ott dead. They also found that the floors and the furniture had been soaked in gasoline. The fire department was called initially because a pile of debris and an abandoned car were burning on the side of the house.

Following the discovery of Ott’s body, the police canvassed the neighborhood trying to determine what happened and attempting to find the suspect. In a neighbor’s shed, they found the owner of the house that Ott lived in, 52-year-old Robert Stover. He had barricaded himself inside and a few moments after being confronted by police, Stover committed suicide inside of the shed.

The initial investigation of the crime revealed that Ott and Stover had been having problems. They were roommates and neighbors told police that Stover had been trying to get Ott to leave his home, but he had been unsuccessful. Ott had only been living with Stover for a few months prior to her death, but from the time she moved in there were problems. The neighbor across the street, Oscard Villegas said, “Every time they argue they bring it outside. . . . Even when they’re inside they scream at the top of their lungs.”

Neighbors spoke highly of Stover, saying that he was a good neighbor, considerate, and willing to help when needed. Daniel Koontz, a student at UNCC who lived next door said that Stover brought him a basket of tomatoes when he first moved into the neighborhood. Villegas told WCNC that Stover would give him and his father rides the store when their car was broken down. However, not everything was as nice at it seemed.

Man Found Guilty in Death of UNC Student

Published on: December 23, 2011 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

WRAL recently reported that a North Carolina jury has found Laurence Lovette, Jr. guilty of murder in the tragic 2008 shooting death of Eve Carson, a UNC Chapel Hill student who was brutally murdered. In the prosecution’s closing argument, they told the victm’s story. She was kidnapped at gunpoint near her home and was held for several hours. Lovette and another individual stuffed her in her own car and drove her to two separate ATMs. Lovette then took a total of $700.00 from her bank account.

The prosecution told the jury that there was overwhelming evidence against Lovette. He was seen by surveillance cameras near the scene of the crime just a few minutes before Carson was kidnapped. Lovette was also caught by the ATMs’ security cameras while he was withdrawing money from Carson’s account.

In addition to being found guilty of first-degree murder, Lovette was also convicted of first-degree kidnapping, first-degree armed robbery, felonious larceny, and felonious possession of stolen goods. For the murder conviction, he will spend the rest of his life in prison. The sentences for the other charges are to run consecutively with the life sentence. Thus, there is no possibility of Lovette being released from prison.

His attorneys tried to explain to the jury during sentencing that Lovette had a difficult childhood. His father died at age 13 and by age 17 he was on his way to becoming a hardened criminal. Defense attorney Karen Bethea-Shields said that her client is very compassionate despite the prosecution’s claims that he is a callous cold-hearted killer. She said, “He has a very close-knit family, and it’s very difficult for his family… He knows that, and he worries about his mother and sisters. He’s grown a lot since 2008, and he has plans, even now when he goes to prison, to get his education degrees and keep on doing what he needs to do to make himself better.”

Governor Perdue Exercises Veto Power on North Carolina Death Row Bill

Published on: December 20, 2011 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

According to the Charlotte Observer, Republican lawmakers recently introduced a bill in the North Carolina legislature that would have brought an end to a two-year death penalty law.

The current state of the North Carolina death penalty jurisprudence allows death row inmates to use racial statistics to demonstrate that there was racial bias in their death sentences. The new law proposed by Republican lawmakers would have prevented death row inmates from utilizing these racial statistics, but Governor Perdue vetoed that bill.

It is unlikely that this veto will be overridden. The Republicans need five Democrats to come to their aide to override the veto and garnering that support is likely impossible. Governor Perdue’s veto keeps the Racial Justice Act effective as North Carolina law, which permits the introduction of statistics to bolster an inmate’s claim that his or her death sentence was racially biased. It began with a Michigan study that shows that the killers of white victims are more than two times more likely to receive a death sentence than the killers of black victims.

The Michigan study was informed by the Baldus study, a famous study that was used as evidence in McClesky v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (1987).

In that case, the defendant attempted to use racial statistics as evidence that the death penalty was racially biased. However, the Supreme Court disagreed with the defendant’s argument and said that discriminatory impact of the death penalty is not the same as discriminatory intent and intent is what is admissible as evidence. North Carolina’s death penalty law provides more protection than the Supreme Court’s federal law, which is permissible under the United States Constitution. Constitutional law provides the floor, not the ceiling, for protection of individual liberties.

Governor Perdue’s exercise of her veto power is probably going to cost her as she defends office next election. While she stressed that she remains in favor of the death penalty, she also noted that it is “important to ensure prosecutions and sentences are not tainted by racial prejudice.” Governor Perdue’s tough-on-crime stance took a hit when she vetoed this bill and she is going to have to do a lot of work to make sure that combats the criticism she will surely face as a result of her decision.

Dealing with the death penalty comes at the end of a long and arduous trial process. After two separate trials to first determine guilt and then determine the implementation of the death penalty, then comes the mandatory appellate process that can drag on for several more years.

Charlotte Drag Racer Guilty of Involuntary Manslaughter

Published on: December 15, 2011 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

car picture.jpg WCNC recently reported that Tyler Stasko, a 23-year-old North Carolina man, was convicted of involuntary manslaughter for the street racing accident that caused the death of three others in April 2009. The jury deliberated for about a day and a half before handing down the verdict. The judge proceeded immediately to sentencing and gave Stasko a term of 45-54 months in jail.

The victim’s families were extremely disappointed with the outcome of the case and afterwards one group told the press, “We want everyone to know how very dark our world is without Cynthia and the baby,” said Sharon Furr. “We really want everyone to know the loss that we’ve suffered. We want them to know how sad we are, and we want them to know how sad we are today with this outcome.”

The victim was Cynthia Furr, Winthrop University professor. She and her two year-old daughter were on their way to church when they were killed when Stasko’s car, traveling more than 80 M.P.H., crashed into Furr’s car. Investigators said that Stasko had a passenger with him, a 13 year-old boy, who was also killed in the tragic accident. At trial, a detective testified that there was no indication that Stasko slowed down before barreling into Furr’s car.

The prosecution charged Stasko with three counts of second-degree murder, but after the jury heard all of the evidence, he was instead convicted of the lesser offense of involuntary manslaughter, a Class F felony in North Carolina. Essentially, the jury found that there was no malice in Stasko’s actions. The jury found that he did not have intent to kill or intent to cause serious bodily harm.

Stasko testified in his own defense and told the jury that he and a black Camaro were racing. He came over a hill and the next thing he knew, Furr’s Mercedes pulled out in front of him. He told detectives in his interview that he tried to hit the brakes as hard as possible, but the collision was inevitable. He admitted that he was speeding. He also admitted that the accident was mostly his fault. Based on the jury’s verdict, it appears they accepted his version of events.

Wal-Mart Denies Disabled North Carolina Identity Theft Victim Repayment

Published on: December 13, 2011 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

wal mart.png WCNC recently reported the tragic story of Sonya Duggan, a 45-year-old disabled woman who was the victim of identity theft. Investigators say that Sonya’s lump sum disability payment of $5,800 was stolen from her Wal-Mart debit card account. The police say that the perpetrator or perpetrators squandered Sonya’s money in six different cities across three different states over the course of only two days. Sonya suffers from a rare disease and this Thanksgiving was the first time she had been home in five years, having spent years in the hospital suffering from pneumonia.

It should not have been difficult for a bank to recognize that the transactions from Sonya’s debit account were fraudulent transactions, but Wal-Mart failed to catch the fraud as it was occurring. Even later, when Sonya and her husband requested that Wal-Mart restore the stolen money to her debit card account, the giant corporation denied her request. Wal-Mart sent her a letter explaining the reason for their denial indicating that Sonya gave her husband the personal identification number to her debit card. Sonya explained that due to her illness, her husband serves as her primary caregiver. As such, he needed access to her debit card so that he can purchase her prescription medications.

Although Wal-Mart is not required to reimburse Sonya for the money that was stolen from her, the Better Business Bureau believes that if investigators can prove to Wal-Mart that there was evidence of fraud, it is likely that Wal-Mart will restore the stolen funds. However, that restoration may not come in time for Sonya and her family to enjoy the holiday season or even in time to pay regular household expenses.

It is important for consumers to protect their finances during this holiday season. Identity theft and fraud provide criminals with unlimited access to unprotected stashes of someone else’s cash. There are ways to protect your debit cards during this season. Follow these few simple tips and you should be able to keep your hard-earned money safe for holiday spending.

North Carolina Moves to Protect Unborn Children

Published on: December 2, 2011 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Criminal Post #2 image.bmp This month, on December 1, 2011, the North Carolina legislature passed the North Carolina Unborn Victims of Violence Act. WBTV reports that the new law will hold an individual criminally responsible for the death of an unborn baby which results from an attack on the mother. The law was sparked by the vicious murder of several pregnant women whose murderers were not ultimately held accountable for the death of the fetuses. According to an article in the Winston-Salem Journal, the law will be named after an unborn baby boy, Ethen, who died when his mother, Jenna Nielson, was murdered in 2007.

The passage of the law was also influenced by the murder of Cherika Adams and her unborn child by Carolina Panther’s player Rae Carruth. Carruth murdered Adams, his pregnant girlfriend, because he did not want to pay child support. Carruth hired a team of people to murder Adams as the two were supposed to leave for dinner and a movie. Under the law at that time, Carruth could only be charged with the murder of Adams, even though her fetus was viable at the time of the attack.

Assistant District Attorney Steve Ward said, “In the past the law had been that the fetus had to be born alive and then die before you could charge a homicide. Now you can charge a homicide from the mere fact that the fetus dies as an intentional act by the suspect in the case.” Proponents of the law believe that the measure is important because many potential victims are targeted specifically because they are with child. Rep. Dale Folwell, R-Forsyth, the chief sponsor of the law said, “This law is about murderers and thugs and how we’re going to treat them…If this prevents one woman from being murdered, it will be successful.”

North Carolina is now among thirty-six states with similar laws. The law, however, is not without its opponents. Critics say that the law has nothing to do with protecting the women, as its proponents claim, but its primary goal is to curb a woman’s right to an abortion. Opponents say that the law does little to prevent or restrict violence against women. Its real purpose is to establish that a fetus is a person for purposes of North Carolina penal law. Carey Pope, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice North Carolina, said that “Once the law establishes a fetus as a full, living person throughout all nine months, as the law does, it becomes easier down the road to strip away abortion rights.”

Armed Gunmen Open Fire in North Carolina Mall

Published on: November 28, 2011 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

According to a recent news report by WRAL, police in Fayetteville are searching for two armed suspects who opened fire in a crowded shopping mall. Shoppers had already begun to arrive in anticipation of Black Friday’s massive retail discounts when the shooting began. Police say that one of the suspects fired the first shots around 2 a.m. near the entrance to the food court at Cross Creek Mall in Fayetteville, North Carolina. One individual ran inside the mall, followed by another armed man when the second suspect fired a second round of shots outside of the Macy’s Department Store.

Police say that no one with injuries checked into the local hospital, Cape Fear Valley Medical Center. Although no one was injured by the gunfire, the incident caused panic and chaos throughout the crowded shopping mall. Shoppers were frightened and many of them left the Cross Creek Mall to continue their Black Friday shopping in a less gunfire prone location.

Some shoppers reported people being trampled in the melee as the terrified shoppers tried to find a place of safety. One shopper was reported as saying, “People were running and they were yelling. . . Our first instinct was to hide, to get away from the situation.” That, however, did not seem to stop the holiday shopping spirit and Black Friday buying quickly resumed after the Cumberland County Sheriff’s Department restored order at the mall.

The shooting at the Cross Creek Mall was not the only episode of violence that erupted this weekend among eager Black Friday shoppers. There were several reported incidents across the country where overzealous shoppers resorted to unsavory tactics to take advantage of Black Friday’s retail discounts. In Los Angeles, California a woman allegedly pepper-sprayed her fellow shoppers as she was attempting to securer X-Box gaming consoles on sale at a local Wal-Mart. There was also an incident in Kingston, North Carolina where a security guard was forced to use his pepper spray to bring order to an unruly crowd.

If and when the suspects in the Cross Creek Mall incident are captured, they may face several possible state and federal charges. If either suspect has been previously convicted of a felony, they come under the jurisdiction of the Felony Firearms Act in North Carolina which prohibits felony offenders from buying, owning, or possessing firearms. There are also federal firearms statutes that apply to felony offenders who are found in possession of handguns and other firearms. Both of these laws may apply simultaneously (because the federal and state governments are independent sovereigns), increasing the likelihood that these gunmen will face several years behind bars.

Seven Arrested After North Carolina Child Found Locked in Room

Published on: November 25, 2011 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

child abuse article.bmp According to a recent report by WFMY News, seven people were arrested after a child was found locked in a room at a home in Thomasville, North Carolina. A woman called the Thomasville Police and told them that she had been kidnapped and assaulted by her boyfriend. Officers responded and conducted an investigation and issued several warrants, including one for the woman’s boyfriend, Joshua Reed. Upon a search of the location, police located several other suspects, marijuana and prescription drugs. They also found several children inside the home including a small child locked inside a room. The home was in disarray so investigators called in the Davidson County Department of Social Services and removed the children. The police have charged five people with a number of charges including kidnapping, assault, possession of marijuana and child neglect.

North Carolina defines a neglected child as a one who is denied adequate “care, supervision, or discipline” by a parent or guardian. The North Carolina Division of Social Services provides a list of signs to look for in a child to determine if they are suffering from neglect. If the child begs for food, lacks medical or dental care, does not have appropriate clothing for the weather or abuses alcohol or other drugs; then it is likely that the child has been or is being neglected. There are also signs to look for in parents. If the parent seems apathetic or depressed, behaves in a bizarre manner or abuses alcohol, then it is possible that the parent is abusing or neglecting his or her children.