Articles in the Juvenile Law category

One of the unique aspects of juvenile delinquency procedure is the intake and evaluation process. This mandatory process precedes commencement of a delinquency court action and determines if an initial […]

I am happy to share a new resource with you: Delinquency Law: Original Juvenile Jurisdiction and Juvenile Jurisdiction over Parents, Guardians, and Custodians. This new Juvenile Law Bulletin (1) describes the current law of original juvenile jurisdiction; (2) provides a guide to the law of original juvenile jurisdiction based on offense dates between 2019 and 2024; and (3) describes juvenile jurisdiction over parents, guardians, and custodians of juvenile respondents in delinquency proceedings. Selected highlights from the Bulletin are provided below.

The Juvenile Code provides explicit procedure for discovery in juvenile delinquency matters. This procedure does not mirror the law that governs discovery in criminal matters. The statutes also do not address the constitutional obligation for disclosure of certain exculpatory evidence under the standard established in Brady v. Maryland, 83 S.Ct. 1194 (1963). This post explains both the statutory framework for and constitutional obligation regarding discovery in delinquency cases.

The 2025 legislative session resulted in a small number of changes to the laws that govern delinquency proceedings. They include extended terms of probation and post-release supervision in some cases, prosecutorial authority to file a motion for review, a new requirement for hearings to terminate probation for cases in which there is a victim, and technical changes to conform school notification requirements.

The most recent Court of Appeals delinquency-related decision, In the Matter of D.H., ___ N.C.App. ___ (August 20, 2025), is one of a very few opinions that addresses a trial court’s order placing a juvenile in the custody of a department of social services (DSS custody) through a delinquency disposition. This area of law can be very confusing for practitioners. At its core, the juvenile is in DSS custody without a petition alleging abuse, neglect, or dependency; instead, there is a petition alleging the juvenile is delinquent. The possibility of DSS custody is also available in undisciplined juvenile proceedings. This blog provides a brief overview of when the court can issue such an order in a delinquency or undisciplined case and explains why simultaneous nonsecure and secure custody orders and dispositional orders that include both DSS custody and commitment to a Youth Development Center (YDC) are a legal impossibility.

A new school year is upon us and students across North Carolina are back in classrooms and on athletic fields. The question of who is eligible to participate in interscholastic athletics in North Carolina’s public schools is answered by the student participation rules established by the North Carolina State Board of Education. Those rules include a ban on participation following a felony conviction. This post explains the rule, explores how it applies to various legal outcomes, and offers considerations for practitioners involved in cases in which a minor is being prosecuted in criminal court for a felony charge.

The law that governs which cases begin under juvenile jurisdiction changed three times between 2019 and 2025. Each change applies to offenses beginning on and after the effective date of the legislation and is impacted by subsequent changes. This blog pulls the different changes together in one place, providing the quick reference chart below to explain which cases begin under juvenile jurisdiction and which cases begin under criminal jurisdiction.

Dispositional orders in delinquency cases must contain “appropriate findings of fact and conclusions of law.” G.S. 7B-2512(a). What constitutes appropriate findings of fact is a question that North Carolina appellate courts have repeatedly addressed. This blog explains the requirement for findings in delinquency dispositional orders and provides examples of findings that the North Carolina Court of Appeals has found to be sufficient.

Does the law regarding motor vehicle seizure when a person is charged with felony speeding to elude arrest or an offense involving impaired driving apply to juveniles? If the case is subject to original juvenile jurisdiction, the answer is no. Read on to understand why that is and what to do if a seizure order is improperly issued.

The Interstate Compact for Juveniles (ICJ) is a binding compact that establishes the law that governs the interstate movement of juveniles who are involved in the juvenile justice system. One of the purposes of the ICJ is to “[r]eturn juveniles who have… been accused of an offense to the state requesting their return.” G.S. 7B-4001(b)(3). This is akin to the extradition process used in criminal matters. The proper procedure to return a juvenile who is accused of an act of delinquency in another state to that other state is found in the ICJ rules. This post walks through the procedure.