About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

100 N.C. L. Rev. F. 1 (2021-2022)

handle is hein.journals/addendum100 and id is 1 raw text is: 100 N.C. L. REV. F. 1 STATE v. CARTER AND THE NORTH CAROLINA EXCLUSIONARY RULE* MOLLY S. PETREY & CHRISTOPHER A. BROOK The North Carolina Supreme Court's decision in State v. Carter stands apart from modern federal jurisprudence in holding that Article 1, Section 20 of the North Carolina Constitution-North Carolina's analog to the Fourth Amendment-does not permit a good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule. In other words, evidence collected in violation of North Carolina's constitutional search and seizure protections is excluded from criminal proceedings, regardless of the good faith of the judicial officials and law enforcement officers involved in the case. In so holding, Carter exemplifies North Carolina's general approach when interpreting state constitutional provisions with federal analogs-the persuasive lockstep. The persuasive lockstep approach considers federal jurisprudence highly persuasive but does not mechanically follow it, on occasion affording more robust constitutional protections pursuant to the state constitution. Controversial since its publication in 1988, Carter has been increasingly criticized over the past decade, from legislative calls for its reversal to recent North Carolina Court of Appeals opinions unpersuasively contending that it has been superseded by statute. Though its constitutional force remains plain for the moment, these recent developments call into question the fate of Carter as well as the means of constitutional interpretation it represents. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 2 I. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE ............ 3 II. INTERPRETING THE NORTH CAROLINA CONSTITUTION VIS-A-VIS ANALOGOUS CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS IN GENERAL AND INSTATE V. CARTER .................................................................. 8 A. Modes of Interpretation and North Carolina's Persuasive Lockstep A pproach.......................................................................... 9 B. The Persuasive Lockstep Exemplar: State v. Carter and Its P rogeny ............................................................................ 12 III. THE POST-CARTER LANDSCAPE..................................................15 * © 2021 Molly S. Petrey & Christopher A. Brook. ** Molly Petrey is a staff attorney at North Carolina Prisoner Legal Services, Inc. Christopher Brook is a partner at Patterson Harkavy LLP, having served on the North Carolina Court of Appeals in 2019 and 2020. The authors thank Emily Coward, Andrew DeSimone, and Jonathan Holbrook for their sage editorial feedback, which vastly improved early drafts of this Article.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most