Charlotte Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

Malcolm Xavier Springs faces a variety of criminal charges stemming from a 03/20/11 robbery on West Trade Street in Charlotte. According to Police, Mr. Springs exchanged gunfire with a CMPD officer after the robbery, and both men were wounded. Mr. Springs was later taken to Carolinas Medical Center for treatment of his injuries. He eventually recovered enough for transport to the Mecklenburg County jail.

The case is unique in several aspects. First, multiple witness claim CMPD officers used unnecessary force after arresting Mr. Springs. According to initial reports, eight residents along Garibaldi Street claim to be eyewitnesses to the Defendant's arrest. These individuals claim the CMPD officers used unnecessary force after handcuffing Mr. Springs. Per the witnesses, officers hit, kicked, and stomped Mr. Springs, but they did not see him resisting arrest. Wade Miller, one of the witnesses indicated "They were beating him... He was handcuffed. I didn't see the man moving."

The second unique aspect of the case is the Police response to the situation. Tuesday's CMPD statement requested witnesses to come forward with information regarding the incident. According to a CMPD statement, "In an effort to preserve the trust and confidence of the community, the CMPD investigates all accusations of officer misconduct".

Continue reading "Charlotte Police Investigate Incident Of Alleged Officer Brutality" »

The U.S. Supreme Court long ago ruled prosecutors must produce evidence that potentially exonerates a Defendant; i.e. anything that is potentially beneficial to the Defendant's case. In 2004, the North Carolina Court clarified that District Attorneys must share everything in the file in all felony cases.

However, the North Carolina legislature has proposed a bill that would hold prosecutors responsible for giving defense counsel only what detectives have provided the prosecution; not what investigators might have withheld. This proposed amendment to the law is a substantial distinction. As Mark Rabil (co-director of the Innocence and Justice Clinic at Wake Forest University School of Law) notes, it provides District Attorneys a way to withhold evidence without legal / ethical responsibility. "The measure gives prosecutors a way to say, well, it was not in our file so we cannot be held responsible for turning this over." It's important to note that defense attorneys are not able to demand the production of law enforcement documentation, so the production from District Attorneys is crucial to the legal process.

The practical implications of this issue are obvious. Ask Greg Taylor or Darryl Hunt whether this issue is important; they each spent over 17 years in prison on fraudulent murder convictions. The Iredell County murder trial of Al Bellamy is also currently in jeopardy because the prosecution produced approximately 1,700 pages of discovery three weeks into the trial.

Continue reading "Proposed Law Would Allow District Attorneys To Withhold Evidence" »

Some North Carolina District Attorneys apparently continue to hold on to the blanket, unfounded assertion that no wrongs were committed on account of the State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) scandal recently uncovered. However, the independent audit commissioned by Attorney General Roy Cooper determined the SBI crime lab withheld or misreported blood test results in 229 cases. The SBI said this week that it has identified an additional 74 cases with similar issues.

The District Attorneys' position is simply ridiculous in light of the recent audit and examples of specific cases. Derrick Allen would certainly disagree. Chris Foye would likewise argue these District Attorneys are wrong.

Mr. Foye pled guilty to the 1991 murder of Bobbie Jean Morgan. After consultation with his defense attorneys, Mr. Foye decided to enter a plea (without acknowledging guilt) to the charge to avoid the risk of receiving the death penalty if convicted at trial. The problem with the case is that the SBI had identified another man's DNA in the victim's panties. That information would have obviously been tremendously important to his defense. However, the State never produced this potentially exonerating evidence to the defense. William Gerrans, who defended Mr. Foye noted "I absolutely never saw any report about DNA. If I had, I would have never let Chris plead." The SBI also failed to report a confirmatory test for blood was inconclusive. This test would have further provided an argument for the defense.

Continue reading "North Carolina District Attorneys Continue To Ignore Reality Of SBI Corruption" »

On March 21, 2001, A Gaston County Jury convicted Mark Carver of the 2008 first-degree murder of Irina Yarmolenko, which occurred near the Catawba River. Ms. Yarmolenko was a UNC Charlotte student who went to the river to shoot photos of kayakers on the day in question. According to Mr. Carver, he was fishing in the area with his cousin, Neal Cassada that day. Mr. Cassada, who was also charged with the crime, died last year a day before his trial was to begin.

Mr. Carver was represented by David Phillips and Brent Ratchford. The key evidence in the trial was DNA evidence from the Defendant that was present on Ms. Yarmolenko's vehicle. Notably, Mr. Carver's DNA was not present on the victim's body or on the bindings used to kill her. Her body was discovered near the vehicle.

The prosecution suggested to the jury that the Defendant attacked Ms. Yarmolenko because she photographed him doing something he didn't want revealed. The prosecution also questioned the Defendant's prior statement that he had never seen Ms. Yarmolenko, which seemed contradicted by the presence of his DNA on her vehicle. The defense suggested that Ms. Yarmolenko may have committed suicide.

The jury only deliberated six hours before returning the guilty verdict. Some have questioned defense counsel's strategy of presenting no witnesses. Mr. Ratchford responded "I think they wanted to find someone responsible for the murder," he said. "And my client was the one in the courtroom." Mr. Ratchford noted the State has the burden of proving the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. He felt the State's case was weak.

Continue reading "Gastonia Murder Verdict Raises Questions Regarding Burden Of Proof" »

North Carolina Police operated a "Booze It and Loose It" campaign during the week of St. Patrick's Day (03/11/11 to 03/17/11). N.C. authorities made a total of 1,013 arrests pursuant to the campaign. N.C. Transportation Secretary Gene Conti believes the campaign was a success. He indicated the campaign operated by highway patrol, local sheriff's offices, and local police resulted in over 1,000 DWI arrests.

However, some of the figures from the campaign are a bit troubling without further investigation and/or explanation. Police arrested 124 motorists for DWI in Mecklenburg County. Of the counties surrounding Charlotte, only Cabarrus (26 DWI arrests) had over 20 DWI arrests. Wake County only had 94 DWI arrests.

Mecklenburg and Wake counties are the two most populated counties in North Carolina. Thus, it stands to reason there would be higher incidents of arrests in these counties. However, the numbers do appear to be somewhat skewed / disproportionate.
Some specific statistics from the campaign include:

Mecklenburg County:
Checkpoints/patrols: 211
DWI arrests: 124
Speeding citations: 652
Total traffic citations: 2,522

Cabarrus County:
Checkpoints/patrols: 15
DWI arrests: 26
Speeding citations: 251
Total traffic citations: 915

Wake County:
Checkpoints/patrols: 124
DWI arrests: 94
Speeding citations: 815
Total traffic citations: 2541

Continue reading "Are Police Disproportionately Targeting Charlotte Area Motorists?" »

In 1998, Derrick Allen was charged with the sexual assault and death of his girlfriend's two-year-old daughter. Mr. Allen accepted a plea deal to avoid the potential death penalty. Notably, he did not admit guilt in the plea. Mr. Allen subsequently spent twelve years in prison following his conviction.

However, that is not the end of Mr. Allen's case. Judge Hudson of Durham County Superior Court recent issued a lengthy Order chastising Durham prosecutors and the N.C. State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) crime lab. Judge Hudson noted the state withheld important evidence that could have exonerated Mr. Allen. Judge Hudson openly criticized Tracey Cline (current District Attorney / Assistant District Attorney at the time of the case) in particular for her failure to disclose potentially exonerating evidence.

Specifically, the district attorney misled the defense about blood evidence in the case. SBI agent Jennifer Elwell also prepared a misleading report, falsely indicating the presence of blood in the victim's underwear. Freda Black served as an Assistant District Attorney at the time of the case. She testified such evidence was crucial to the case.
The attorneys in question deny any wrongdoing. However, their actions will be reviewed by the North Carolina Bar. As for the N.C. SBI, the agency has been in the news lately for various incidents that raise serious questions about its integrity.

This case, questions that continue to arise regarding District Attorney offices around North Carolina, and the ongoing questions regarding the N.C. SBI are all clear reasons why anyone with a criminal charge needs to obtain a qualified Charlotte criminal lawyer. There are a variety of legal issues that must be addressed with any criminal matter, whether it is a misdemeanor or a felony charge. However, a skilled criminal / traffic attorney will be aware of these additional issues that can have a substantial effect on your case. If you require assistant with a criminal case, please consult a Charlotte, North Carolina criminal attorney immediately for a free consultation.

NewsObserver.Com, Up To The Bar, 03/16/11

TheHeraldSun.Com, Crime Lab Errors Free Derrick Allen

The Republican majority of the North Carolina legislature is pushing several items of proposed legislature that significantly reduce the legal rights of N.C. citizens. One of the glaring problems with these bills is that there is little practical / common sense justification for these bills (other than obvious political motivation).

Senate Bill 33 has been proposed as a medical malpractice reform bill, with the essential justification to reduce healthcare costs and lower supposed out-of-control verdicts. However, the New England Journal of Medicine reports that preventable medical mistakes kill 4,000 patients and permanently injure 5,700 patiently annually in North Carolina alone. Medical malpractice kills more people annually in North Carolina than auto accidents, breast cancer, and murder combined.

Your elected officials are responding to these statistics: 9,700 of you severely injured / killed annually by medical malpractice annually. However, they are not responding as you would think; they are instead letting the insurance companies and doctors off the hook. The proposal (S.B. 33) proposes a uniform cap on damages. It doesn't matter how bad your injury is; it doesn't matter how badly you are maimed; it doesn't matter how long you have to live; it doesn't matter how bad the pain is; nothing matters! The damages are capped at $500,000. The facts of your case are irrelevant.

If you will note my recent blog posts, you will note there are a variety of legal scholars, including a Supreme Court Justice who has warned this proposal is unconstitutional. It is also just plain stupid. As for the stupidity, the proposal provides near immunity for emergency room physicians. Just ask yourself this question: if you should require emergency room care, would you want the physician to be held to a completely different standard of care than other doctors?

My challenge to you: think for yourself. Do you really think that allowing doctors to commit malpractice with no repercussions is going to help decrease healthcare cost? Do you really think that insurance companies are going to lower your premiums, and cut their profits? My expectation is that malpractice will occur at a much higher rate, while the injured patients have no recovery for their harm. As many people have no insurance, much of the resulting care needed will be pushed onto Medicare / Medicaid (two already bankrupt systems). For those of you who have health insurance, your premiums will continue to increase; they are not going to decrease.

My advice, contact your representatives promptly and voice your concerns specifically and loudly. The strong objection of various individuals is the only way that these laws will not be passed.

Op-ed: Patients deserve protection from medical mistakes, FayObserver.com, 02/27/11

The North Carolina Advocates For Justice (NCAJ) is warning residents of N.C. of the dangers from proposed Senate Bill 33. SB 33 is a medical malpractice reform bill proposed primarily by N.C. Republican legislators recently. You can find concise information regarding the proposed law that will allow you to contact your representatives to voice any concerns you may have. You can also find further commentary regarding these recent legislative efforts, and the effect on your legal rights, on my blog. I certainly encourage you to take the time to relay any such concerns, as this proposed bill is still being debated.

Please keep in my that further encroachment upon your legal rights is expected in the coming weeks, as many of your elected officials continue to choose to pander to special interest groups rather than representing their constituents. I will continue to post information regarding these proposals on my blog, so you can stay informed and voice your concerns.

One thing that both Republicans and Democrats will agree on is that the current economy (local and national) is less than ideal. Unfortunately, many of the currently elected officials are using the current economic client as a poor excuse for some of the pathetically reasoned work they are doing. These efforts are going to have a tremendously negative effect on Charlotte, NC residents who suffer personal injuries.

For instance, the N.C. Tort Reform Committee introduced Senate Bill 33 in early, which proposes to overhaul the current legal scheme for medical malpractice cases in North Carolina. The N.C. Senate approved the bill, and it now resides in the N.C. House for review. Of course, your elected officials have proceeded with this course of action against significant evidence that the general public opposes such measures. A poll released 02/24/11 (before SB 33 passed) revealed that 70% - 77% of the public opposed immunity for emergency room negligence.

Query why your elected representatives are pushing legislation that you are opposed to? Perhaps they are simply pleasing large corporations and insurance companies that have lined their pockets with contributions. Regardless of their irresponsible reasoning, you should immediately contact your representative and notify him/her of your objections to the tort reform legislation (bills) unless you want to see your rights evaporate. You can review detailed, yet concise information regarding Senate Bill 33 that will allow you to easily determine your stance on this issue. Please note there are further reform bills in the legislative process, which are just as damaging to your legal rights. I encourage you to educate yourself regarding these matters and voice your concerns.

As noted herein, many individuals have expressed concern over this legislation. The Fayetteville Observer noted that they were warned by a Supreme Court Justice that the provision was unconstitutional. Other obvious concerns regarding the bill are inherently noted in the bill.

However, the newspaper picked up on another obvious point the proponents of the bill want to ignore. They claim this bill will reduce healthcare costs. However, anyone with any knowledge of the insurance industry will tell you that while medical malpractice will continue to occur, the insurance companies will not reduce their premiums. It is also rather doubtful that medical providers are going to cut their prices; it's all a public relations gimmick - with one obvious consequence: most of the injuries resulting from these cases (and resulting treatment) are going to be pushed on to Medicare / Medicaid, two systems that are already bankrupt.

The Shield - Liability Reform Is Legislative Malpractice, FayObserver.com, 03/13/11, FayObserver.com, 03/13/11

Former N.C. Supreme Court Chief Justice Bev Lake recently opined that the proposed legislation (Senate Bill 33) that would vastly reduce medical malpractice victims' rights in the state is unconstitutional. Justice Lake specifically stated that the proposed arbitrary cap on recovery for damages in such claims which Senate Republicans have proposed would be unconstitutional. Proponents of the legislation have pushed a $250,000 cap.

Justice Lake served on the North Carolina Supreme Court for twelve years, sitting as the Chief Justice from 2000 to 2006. I find Justice Lake's opinion particularly interesting given that he is a Republican. The current round of "tort reform" bills being introduced in the N.C. legislature, which are aimed to destroy the rights of the states' citizens, are being pushed primarily by Republicans. Justice Lake made some very important points in an interview regarding Senate Bill 33. He noted that such a cap is "unnecessary as well as unconstitutional". He further stated "North Carolina citizens have a 'sacred and inviolable' right to have a jury determine the amount of compensatory damages, including non-economic damages, under our Constitution. The right to have a jury make that decision cannot be eliminated or restricted by the General Assembly."

Continue reading "North Carolina Supreme Court Justice Opines On Pending Medical Malpractice Bill" »

The NCAJ expects N.C. Representative Dale Folwell to file a bill to vastly reduce the rights of injured workers in North Carolina sometime prior to March 24. While the exact substance of the proposed legislation is uncertain, the intent of this bill is clear: to pander to the special interests of the N.C. Chamber of Commerce, the Insurance Industry, and large corporations. The legislators proposing this bill will do so at the expense of individuals who suffered legitimate, disabling injuries in North Carolina in their employment. The victim of this law will be you!
It is expected that Representative Folwell and his colleagues will propose legislation that will completely overhaul the current workers' compensation law in North Carolina.

This is a shameless attempt to quickly push through a bill (largely without the public's knowledge), and completely change the law to the detriment of disabled workers for the benefit of special interest groups. The expected bill will do several things, so we'll address the likely issues in turn:

Continue reading "North Carolina Workers' Compensation Bill Threatens Injured Workers" »

March 01, 2011 was a horrible day for North Carolina residents. The state judiciary committee approved a bill proposing essential immunity for emergency physicians for their negligence. The proposal further caps non-economic damages at $500,000. The bill passed the Senate 36-13. All Republicans voted for the bill plus Democratic Senators William Purcell (Scotland), Eric Mansfield (Cumberland), Michael Walters (Robeson), Stan White (Dare), and Ed Jones (Halifax).

Proponents of the bill erroneously argue the need to protect hardworking doctors from frivolous lawsuits. However, they ignore one obvious truth; that the current law provides safeguards against frivolous lawsuits. In fact, 465 medical malpractice lawsuits are filed each year in North Carolina, contrasted with 1.5 million emergency-room visits annually. Furthermore, the 465 annual lawsuits equates to less than 5% of the 9,700 patients killed or permanently injured every year due to medical malpractice. In other words, only 1 in 20 patients who are severely harmed by a preventable medical mistake files suit. So, it's clear the proponents of this legislation have ulterior motives.

Continue reading "Charlotte Residents Will Lose Rights Under Proposed Medical Malpractice Bill" »