One of the central differences between delinquency matters and criminal matters is that juvenile records are not subject to public inspection. This includes juvenile court records (G.S. 7B-3000(b)); all law enforcement records and files concerning juveniles, unless jurisdiction has been transferred to superior court (G.S. 7B-3001(b)); and all records and files maintained by the Division of Juvenile Justice (G.S. 7B-3001(c)). Part II of Session Law 2023-114 adds a new G.S. 7B-3103 to the Juvenile Code to establish a limited exception to the confidentiality of juvenile records. It allows the release of juvenile information to the public under certain circumstances. This new law applies to offenses committed on or after December 1, 2023. Continue Reading

**UPDATE** Effective July 8, 2024, S.L. 2024-34 extended eligibility for financial assistance described in this post to include individuals who are providing full-time foster care to a child in DSS custody that the caretaker is related to and “if applicable, any half siblings, regardless of their [the half-sibling’s] relationship to the kinship caregiver.”  Part IV, Section 4. This allows siblings to be placed together and for the caretaker to receive financial assistance for all the children to whom they are providing full-time care. See G.S. 7B-505(a1); 7B-903.1(c1) (prioritizing siblings being placed together).

Recent changes to both state and federal law aim to increase support for relatives who provide placement and care of juveniles who are the subject of abuse, neglect, and dependency (AND) proceedings. Financial assistance to offset the costs of care and the possibility of new and relaxed licensing standards for relative placements could have a significant effect on a number of juveniles across North Carolina. This post addresses the new laws and considers what it may mean for children, families, and attorneys who represent parents in juvenile AND proceedings.

Continue Reading

It is not uncommon for me to answer calls from judicial officials grappling with breach of contract cases where the official believes there has likely been a breach, but they are unsure which specific term has been breached. Breach of contract cases can be intimidating because they often involve large volumes of conflicting evidence. The judicial official must decide what evidence to exclude, what evidence to admit, and how much weight to give admitted evidence. In cases involving oral contracts, determining the parties’ agreement becomes even more difficult, putting a stronger emphasis on assessing the credibility of witness testimony. However, a lot of the angst over breach of contracts cases can be alleviated by developing a comprehensive, step-by-step approach to analyzing the evidence, in much the same way that judicial officials evaluate evidence to determine if a crime has been committed and that the person arrested committed it.

This post covers recent statutory changes related to the custodial interrogation of youth who are 16 and 17 years of age and to the issuance and execution of secure custody orders in delinquency cases. All of these changes are contained in Session law 2023-114 and will apply to offenses committed on or after December 1, 2023. Continue Reading

In Klein v. Klien, filed October 3, 2023, husband argued on appeal that the trial court erred in failing to include in the calculation of wife’s income for the purpose of setting child support amounts she received when she withdrew funds from a retirement account. Wife testified that she “cashed in an annuity in order to pay off some of [her] bills and credit card debt that [she] had as mostly legal fees and some other purchases.” She withdrew the funds in 2020. The child support hearing was held in June 2021.