News-Record.com

They also found 19.8 grams of crack cocaine, 6.4 grams of marijuana, 17 hydrocodone pills, two counterfeit $100 bills, an electronic scale and a box of plastic bags.

The predictable charges followed, along with this: maintenance of a place to keep and sell controlled substances* Doug

Suppose the Police State victim was hiding under his Brother Snow Cone Sales Van in the drive-way with the stash! Would the court have overturn his conviction as simply another business address being permently located? Location! Location! is still the success motto in today's markets.

NC GS 90-108 (a)(7) may be interpreted in many ways.

"(7) To knowingly keep or maintain any store, shop, warehouse, dwelling house, building, vehicle, boat, aircraft, or any place whatever, which is resorted to by persons using controlled substances in violation of this Article for the purpose of using such substances, or which is used for the keeping or selling of the same in violation of this Article;..."

There is no statutory requirement that the person charged must be the "owner" of the residence, vehicle, storage building, etc.

Just because it was overturned does not mean the prosecutor, police, or sitting judge committed an error. Remember, appeals courts review written testimony only and rule on technical matters.
The crux of the SC ruling is that the prosecution did not provide sufficient evidence to prove that the defendant met the case law requirements for conviction, not that the defendant in reality did not meet them. Big difference.
The only error of the prosecution was apparently in not entering enough evidence to support their allegation that the defendant did, in fact, live in the residence. Decisions on which evidence to submit, coupled with defense motions to suppress, often dictate that not all evidence gets to the jury. The SC can only review what's on the record, they don't retry the case.

Thanks, jaycee.

This was a Court of Appeals ruling, not Supreme Court. It's remotely possible the Supreme Court could review it if the state appeals, but unlikely given the 3-0 decision.

I don't know in this case if the actual owner or tenant of the home was charged with maintaining a drug house. Should have been, if not.

It seems likely to me that the prosecution didn't enter any evidence supporting this charge against Carter because there was no evidence. Maybe the prosecution just figured the jury wouldn't examine the details of that charge and simply would lump all the charges together into a wholesale conviction. Apparently that's what the jury did.

I know sometimes you have to be in the courtroom to really appreciate the case, but it's telling that the record showed no evidence. Prosecutors should never ask a jury to convict someone of a charge "just because we say it's true."

Mr. Carter was just following the "Idiot's Guide to Drug Dealing"'s Rule #1: Never deal drugs out of your own place of residence if another's can be used and he should actually be commended.

He did NOT however use discretion in utilizing the old "overturned recliner trick" for concealment, since this is like #98 on the Hundred Best Places to Hide When Getting Busted.

You're right on both counts.

Under the recliner was a poor hiding place. But is it possible someone else was under the bed ... and wasn't found?

And I inadvertently referred to the Supreme Court decision; it was actually the Court of Appeals.
My point was that just because the prosecution didn't present enough evidence to support the conviction on appeal doesn't mean it didn't exist. We don't know at this point whether it existed and wasn't presented because of suppression efforts by the defense or some other reason. And it could be that not enough evidence of the defendant's occupancy was collected by the officers.
Likewise, the appeals court can't look at other factors, ask questions, or subpoena evidence. It makes it's decision based on what is in the record. If it ain't there, they can't take it into account.

Under the recliner was a poor hiding place. But is it possible someone else was under the bed ... and wasn't found?* Doug

Yes! The undercover agent who snitch him out most likely. According to the record, the defendant was begging for more time to find his ex-girlfriend who disappear off the face of the planet as his star witness.

The question is how in the heck did the defendant turn over a 200 lb recliner chair and than hid under it. If my size counter is correct. The defendant was a drawf that was on steriods.

jaycee, you're correct that the appeals court takes into account only what's on the record. But whatever isn't in the record doesn't count. If the prosecution wants to prove a defendant's guilt, it has to enter evidence into the record.

Yes, Doug, that's what I'm trying to say.
But I stop short of assuming that if a decision is reversed someone must have made an error or mistake. As I said, there may have been ample evidence of the defendant's residency but it was suppressed or not presented due to other technical or legal reasons. It's a rare jury trial in which all the evidence is able to be used. I've had murder trials in which defense suppression hearings took an entire week whittling down the State's evidence.
Then again, maybe he was just visiting. :)

Judge Long shouldn't be able to reside over cases anymore. I bet if someone went back and looked at some of his cases there would be many errors. He gave custody of my daughter to her father.Her first grade teacher came in and said whenever she was with me she never returned homework or was not there. When asked to provide her attendance log and grade book she didn't bring them. Judge Long said she had no reason to lie and gave his verdict then. I don't know if my ex-husband was doing the teacher or if he paid her off. However Judge Long was wrong and one day I hope he goes down hard!