Supreme Court

, Supreme Court , 108PA24 (Justice Paul Newby) , Published
In re L.C.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in vacating the trial court's adjudication order and remanding for additional factual findings about how respondent-mother's actions impaired or substantially risked impairing the welfare of her juvenile daughter.

, Supreme Court , 140A24 (Per Curiam) , Published
White v. N.C. Dep't of Health & Hum. Servs.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in reversing the superior court's order in which it determined that petitioners are entitled to receive adoption assistance benefits several years after the adoption was finalized.

, Supreme Court , 170A24 (Per Curiam) , Published
State v. Melton

Whether the Court of Appeals' majority erred in holding that the trial court did not commit structural error in denying defendant's court-appointed counsel's motion to withdraw for defendant to hire counsel of his own choosing.

, Supreme Court , 280A24 (Per Curiam) , Published
State v. Hunt

Whether defendant satisfied the prejudice prong for plain error where a law enforcement officer testifying as a lay witness gave his opinion regarding defendant's intent at the time of an accident.

, Supreme Court , 86A02-2 (Justice Tamara Barringer) , Published
State v. Bell

Whether defendant's J.E.B. claim is preserved and whether the claim was procedurally barred.

, Supreme Court , 297PA18 (Justice Phil Berger Jr.) , Published
State v. Sims

Whether the sentencing court's findings of the mitigating factors under N.C.G.S. 15A-1340.19B support defendant's juvenile sentence to life without parole, and whether defendant's claims under J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B., 511 U.S. 127 (1994) are procedurally barred under N.C.G.S. 15A-1419(a)(3).

, Supreme Court , 249PA19-2 (Justice Allison Riggs) , Published
Ashe County v. Ashe Cnty. Plan. Bd.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that a land developer was not entitled to the benefit of permit choice based on its determination of application completeness and the existence of a now-expired moratorium.

, Supreme Court , 289PA23 (Justice Richard Dietz) , Published
State v. Fenner

Whether the trial court complied with N.C.G.S. 15A-1242 where it informed a defendant who sought to proceed pro se only of the harshest sentences he faced and miscalculated the maximum sentence by two years, but both the potential sentence and the actual sentence amounted to life in prison.

Subscribe to Supreme Court