Before we talk about our state Supreme Court:

Good news. We won a fight with the Office of Management and Budget, which had unlawfully attempted to defund AmeriCorps.

That move would have hit western NC especially hard. AmeriCorps ramped up their work after the hurricane and is coordinating a lot of the non-profit response.

They also fund a lot of Habitat for Humanity work in our state, and I’ll be joining one of those projects out west next week. (I’ll be doing some roof work, I’m told.)

More cases like this are pending. Updates soon.

Making our case in NC Supreme Court

Last week, I appeared before our state Supreme Court on behalf of our office.

This is very unusual.

AGs almost never argue cases themselves. But a couple months ago, when my team told me about this one, I volunteered.

The facts: A man struck another man in the head with a pistol, then stomped on him, breaking his jaw and teeth and leaving him unconscious in the road at night.

That part is uncontested. He’s convicted of that and not appealing.

But he was also convicted of robbing the victim — but the robbery occurred after the victim lost consciousness.

So his argument, in short, is, “You can’t prove I’m the one who robbed him because he was unconscious. It could have been someone else.”

In response, my argument focused on four points:

The opportunity for a different person to rob the unconscious victim was relatively narrow. (This was contested by defense and became a big disagreement.)
The legal bar for these kinds of challenges is extremely high. My argument was that the jury should be allowed to infer that the person who pistol-whipped and stomped the victim was also the same person who robbed him.
Several years prior, the defendant had pistol-whipped someone else and then robbed them — facts that are almost identical to this case and something the jury was allowed to consider as a factor.
If the defendant’s argument were accepted, it could create an incentive for future robbers to knock victims out before stealing from them, and we don’t want to create an incentive for violence.

You can watch the argument for yourself on YouTube here.

Three general observations about the experience:

Our state Supreme Court justices (we have seven) were highly engaged and asked thoughtful questions. I got some real pushback regarding how long the victim was unconscious, and the defense attorney got real pushback on the defendant’s role in causing the unconsciousness. It was a good back-and-forth.
My preparation for this argument took a whole team. I may have been the one standing up there, but a lot of people came together at our office to help me think through the arguments, counter-arguments, case law, and likely questions. They also put me through a two-hour moot court the week before my argument. This is the kind of work attorneys in our office do every day, and it gave me a new appreciation for their dedication.
Frankly, the defense attorney did an outstanding job. It was her first time appearing before our state Supreme Court, but she was super quick and totally prepared. My whole team was impressed.

And to cap it off, Marisa took off work to watch, and we grabbed a quick photo at the end just before the next case was called:

9/11 Stair Climb

On September 11th, I joined a thousand people at UNC’s football stadium for a stair climb led by UNC’s ROTC, where I was once a cadet.

Together we climbed roughly 2,000 steps in remembrance of the firefighters who ascended the towers that day.

The event had an incredible turnout and a powerful spirit. They blasted music and kept the energy level high. My thanks to the cadets who organized it, and to everyone who joined us.

Best,

Jeff