Drug charges in Charlotte, North Carolina

If you’ve been charged with drug possession, drug sales, drug manufacturing, or drug trafficking in federal or state court, you can count on an experienced criminal trial attorney from the Law Offices of David P. Sheehan to represent you. When charged with a drug related crime, it is crucial that you hire a lawyer that regularly in local courts and has ties within the community. We actively assist clients throughout North Carolina, and are based out of Charlotte-Mecklenburg County.

In North Carolina, Drug Lawyers and Drug Attorneys must fluently understand the North Carolina Controlled Substances Act, which defines and governs all drug laws including drug possession, drug distribution, drug manufacturing, and drug trafficking. Within this statute, drugs are defined by “Schedules.” Methamphetamines also known as Crystal Meth rank on the top of the list as a Schedule 1 drug along with nearly 100 derivatives. Schedule II drugs are comprised of Raw Opiates and derivatives such as Oxycotin, Morphine, and Hydrocodone. Schedule III drugs include Ketamine (special K) and steroids such as Deca Durabolin and Boldenon. Schedule IV drugs are comprised of most barbiturates and non-narcotic prescription drugs such as Alprazolam (xanax). The lowest of all Schedules is Schedule V drugs which are composed of extremely small doses of certain drugs such as codeine. Whether an individual will be facing a felony or misdemeanor charge depends on a drugs particular schedule and the quantity a person is caught with or held in connection to.

Drug PossessionDrug possession can result in a misdemeanor or felony that can have a serious affect on everyone, from all walks of life. We understand that harsh sentences are NOT the solution to a drug related charge, and are willing to assist everyone from professionals, homemakers, and children who have had the unfortunate experience of coming in contact with law enforcement resulting in a drug related charge. Remember, there are many options available to you once you find legal counsel.

Drug SalesIndividuals who are charged in connection to selling drugs usually face more serious penalties due to a felony charge being brought against them. When an individual is charged with selling drugs, it usually stems from a larger quantity of drugs, certain illicit substances, contraband being found on the scene. Multiple charges can result from these instances such as an additional charge of Possession with the Intent to Distribute. If you are facing a charge of possession of drugs with the intent to distribute, this is a serious crime that usually carries a maximum punishment of a jail sentence. Being caught with contraband such as a firearm will result in an even more severe penalty. These penalties for drug possession and drug sales in connection with the possession of a firearm are very serious and requires a competent lawyer that is willing to spend extra time on your case.

Drug ParaphernaliaMany times when an individual is caught with drugs, they receive an additional charge for the possession of drug paraphernalia. Drug paraphernalia charges can seem unfair, and at times unnecessary. The possession of cigarette papers in connection with the possession of marijuana can result in such as charge. As can the possession of a glass pipe with marijuana, crack, or meth. Paraphernalia charges can results in a misdemeanor or felony drug charge depending on what type of drug is found in the paraphernalia. We understand that these charges not only can be, but are excessive, and we will work hard to minimize your additional charges related to the possession of drug paraphernalia.

Drug TraffickingDrug Trafficking usually results in a federal indictment and charges being brought in federal court. Many federal drug trafficking and conspiracy cases are regularly heard at Charlotte North Carolina’s federal courthouse due to the location of I-77, I-85, and I-485 connecting several east coast states to one another. Lawyers that work with Mr. Sheehan at the Law Offices of David P. Sheehan are licensed in federal court in the Western District of NC located in Charlotte as well as several other federal courts as well. Federal drug trafficking charges are very serious and not all lawyers and attorneys in Charlotte are licensed in Federal Court. We are ready to assist individuals facing serious federal drug trafficking charges ranging from the transportation of Marijuana to the drug transporation of Cocaine as well as federal RICO charges.

Drug ManufacturingDrug Manufacturing may be one of the most serious charges that an individual can receive due to the charge of manufacturing being tied to a drug possession charge as well as a potential distribution charge. Individuals are regularly charged with drug manufacturing related crimes for growing marijuana and producing Crystal Meth known as certain Methamphetamines.

Our Criminal Drug Defense is not limited to Charlotte-Mecklenburg County, but Gaston County, Cabarrus County, Lincoln County, Rowan County, and Iredell County as well. Sheehan to talk to an Attorney today.

North Carolina places controlled substances in six schedules, not the federal five

In North Carolina, the Controlled Substances Act sorts every regulated drug into one of six schedules, set out at G.S. 90-89 through G.S. 90-94. The sixth schedule has no federal counterpart. G.S. 90-94 places “Marijuana” and “Tetrahydrocannabinols” in Schedule VI, excepting tetrahydrocannabinols found in a product with “a delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of not more than three-tenths of one percent (0.3%) on a dry weight basis”. The schedule a substance sits in drives the offense class for almost every drug charge brought in the State, which is why the schedule alleged on the face of a charging document is worth checking before anything else is argued.

The schedules do not always match popular assumption. Methamphetamine and cocaine are Schedule II substances under G.S. 90-90, not Schedule I, because for Schedule II the Commission must find “a high potential for abuse”, a “currently accepted medical use in the United States, or currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions”, and that the abuse of the substance “may lead to severe psychic or physical dependence”. Fentanyl, oxycodone, hydrocodone and morphine are listed in the same schedule. Where a charging document has the schedule wrong, the offense class it alleges is usually wrong with it.

Simple possession is graded first by schedule and then by quantity

In North Carolina, the offense of possessing a controlled substance is created by G.S. 90-95(a)(3), and G.S. 90-95(d) fixes what that possession is worth. Under G.S. 90-95(d)(1), possession of a Schedule I substance is a Class I felony, except that where the substance is MDPV and the quantity is one gram or less the violation is punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor. Under G.S. 90-95(d)(2), possession of a Schedule II, III or IV substance is a Class 1 misdemeanor, but the same conduct is punishable as a Class I felony where the substance is methamphetamine, amphetamine, phencyclidine, cocaine, fentanyl or carfentanil, where the quantity exceeds four tablets, capsules or other dosage units of hydromorphone, or where it exceeds one hundred tablets, capsules or other dosage units. Possession of a Schedule V substance is a Class 2 misdemeanor under G.S. 90-95(d)(3).

Schedule VI possession has a structure of its own. Under G.S. 90-95(d)(4) it is a Class 3 misdemeanor, and “any sentence of imprisonment imposed must be suspended and the judge may not require at the time of sentencing that the defendant serve a period of imprisonment as a special condition of probation.” The violation is punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor where the quantity exceeds one-half of an ounce (avoirdupois) of marijuana or one-twentieth of an ounce of the extracted resin commonly known as hashish, and as a Class I felony where it exceeds one and one-half ounces of marijuana or three-twentieths of an ounce of hashish, or where the substance is any quantity of synthetic tetrahydrocannabinols or tetrahydrocannabinols isolated from the resin of marijuana. Weight is therefore often the only fact separating the lowest misdemeanor grade from a felony record.

Selling, delivering and possessing with intent are three separate allegations

In North Carolina, G.S. 90-95(a)(1) makes it unlawful “[t]o manufacture, sell or deliver, or possess with intent to manufacture, sell or deliver, a controlled substance.” Those are distinct ways of violating one subsection and they are not punished alike. Under G.S. 90-95(b)(1), conduct involving a substance classified in Schedule I or II is punished as a Class H felony, except that the sale of such a substance is punished as a Class G felony and the manufacture of methamphetamine is punished instead under G.S. 90-95(b)(1a). Under G.S. 90-95(b)(2), the same conduct involving a substance classified in Schedule III, IV, V or VI is punished as a Class I felony, except that a sale is punished as a Class H felony.

The line between selling and delivering matters, but the two are not opposites. G.S. 90-87(7) defines delivery as “[t]he actual constructive, or attempted transfer from one person to another of a controlled substance, whether or not there is an agency relationship”, so a delivery is complete whether or not anything was paid for the substance; a sale is a transfer for remuneration and is therefore also a delivery. G.S. 90-95(b)(2) carves out one transfer from that definition: “[t]he transfer of less than 5 grams of marijuana for no remuneration shall not constitute a delivery in violation of G.S. 90-95(a)(1).” Intent, in a possession-with-intent case, is rarely proved by an admission. It is argued from packaging, quantity, cash, scales and messages, and whether those circumstances add up is a question for the jury if the case is tried.

A trafficking charge turns on weight, not on evidence of dealing

In North Carolina, a trafficking charge under G.S. 90-95(h) does not require proof that anyone sold anything. Each subdivision reaches a person who “sells, manufactures, delivers, transports, or possesses” the stated quantity, and possession alone is enough. The quantity language is not uniform across substances. G.S. 90-95(h)(1) applies to marijuana “in excess of 10 pounds (avoirdupois)”; G.S. 90-95(h)(3) applies to “28 grams or more” of cocaine; G.S. 90-95(h)(3b) applies to “28 grams or more” of methamphetamine; and G.S. 90-95(h)(4) applies to “four grams or more” of opium, opiate or opioid, a category that takes in heroin and fentanyl. A person holding a package for someone else can satisfy that language as readily as the person who supplied it.

Each tier carries a minimum term and a maximum term stated in the subsection itself rather than drawn from the sentencing chart, together with a minimum fine the subdivision fixes. For marijuana in excess of ten pounds but less than 50 pounds, G.S. 90-95(h)(1) directs punishment as a Class H felon with “a minimum term of 25 months and a maximum term of 39 months in the State’s prison”. Twenty-eight grams of cocaine is a Class G felony with a minimum term of 35 months, while the same 28 grams of methamphetamine is a Class F felony with a minimum term of 70 months – the threshold and the punishment do not move together across substances. Higher weights climb through the further tiers each subdivision sets out. Under G.S. 90-95(i), “[t]he penalties provided in subsection (h) of this section shall also apply to any person who is convicted of conspiracy to commit any of the offenses described in subsection (h)”.

Substantial assistance is one of two statutory routes below a trafficking minimum

In North Carolina, G.S. 90-95(h)(5) provides that “[e]xcept as provided in this subdivision or subdivision (5a) of this subsection, a person being sentenced under this subsection may not receive a suspended sentence or be placed on probation.” The prohibition is qualified on its face, and the qualifications are the whole of the subject. The first is substantial assistance, in the same subdivision. The sentencing judge “may reduce the fine, or impose a prison term less than the applicable minimum prison term provided by this subsection, or suspend the prison term imposed and place a person on probation” where the person has, “to the best of the person’s knowledge, provided substantial assistance in the identification, arrest, or conviction of any accomplices, accessories, co-conspirators, or principals”, and where the judge “enters in the record a finding that the person to be sentenced has rendered such substantial assistance”. The operative verb is may. Nothing in the subdivision obliges a judge to reduce anything, and the assistance is measured against what the person actually knows, not against what the State would like to learn.

The second route is G.S. 90-95(h)(5a), added to the statute more recently, and it is narrow. The subdivision opens by directing that a judge sentencing for a conviction under G.S. 90-95(h), or under G.S. 90-95(i) for conspiracy to commit such a violation, “shall impose the applicable minimum prison term”. The judge “may reduce the fine and sentence the person consistent with the applicable offense classification and prior record level provided in G.S. 15A-1340.17” only after a hearing at which the district attorney has an opportunity to present evidence, and only on entering into the record specific findings that all eleven listed conditions are met. Those conditions include that the defendant has accepted responsibility; has not previously been convicted of a felony under G.S. 90-95; used no violence, credible threat of violence, firearm or other dangerous weapon in this offense or in any other violation of law; has admitted a substance abuse disorder and successfully completed a treatment program approved by the court; that imposition of the mandatory minimum “would result in substantial injustice” and “is not necessary for the protection of the public”; that the sentence is for trafficking, or conspiracy to traffic, by possession alone; that there is no substantial evidence of transport for sale, sale, manufacture or delivery; that the defendant has given all reasonable assistance within their knowledge; and that the quantity falls within the lowest tier for which a trafficking conviction is possible for that substance. A failure on any single condition ends the inquiry.

Consecutive service is a separate question and is dealt with separately. Under G.S. 90-95(h)(6), sentences imposed under the subsection “shall run consecutively with and shall commence at the expiration of any sentence being served by the person sentenced hereunder”. That subdivision speaks to a sentence already being served, so a trafficking sentence is added to existing time rather than absorbed into it. It does not by its terms dictate how two trafficking counts sentenced together in the same proceeding relate to one another.

Paraphernalia sits in a separate article, and marijuana paraphernalia is separate again

In North Carolina, drug paraphernalia offenses are in Article 5B of Chapter 90 rather than in the Controlled Substances Act itself. G.S. 90-113.22(a) makes it unlawful “to knowingly use, or to possess with intent to use, drug paraphernalia” in connection with “a controlled substance other than marijuana”, and subsection (b) provides that “[v]iolation of this section is a Class 1 misdemeanor.” Marijuana paraphernalia has its own section. G.S. 90-113.22A(a) covers paraphernalia used with marijuana, and subsection (b) provides that “[a] violation of this section is a Class 3 misdemeanor” and that the offense “shall be a lesser included offense of G.S. 90-113.22”. Both sections carry an exception for testing equipment used to identify or analyze the strength, effectiveness or purity of a controlled substance, whether held by the person who intends to introduce that substance into their own body or by an organization that promotes scientifically proven ways of mitigating the health risks associated with drug use.

One further provision is easy to miss and occasionally decisive. Under G.S. 90-113.22(c), where an officer asks before conducting a search whether the person is in possession of a hypodermic needle or other sharp object, and the person alerts the officer to it before the search, the person “shall not be charged with or prosecuted for possession of drug paraphernalia for the needle or sharp object, or for residual amounts of a controlled substance contained in the needle or sharp object”. That protection is conditioned on the disclosure being made before the search and reaches only the needle, the sharp object and its residue; it does not extend to anything else recovered. Because possession and paraphernalia are distinct offenses, one encounter regularly produces two charges from a single set of facts – the substance and the container, the pipe or the papers – and the paraphernalia count is not a formality: it carries its own conviction and is proved and disposed of separately from the substance count.

Keeping a dwelling or vehicle for drugs is charged as a course of conduct

In North Carolina, G.S. 90-108(a)(7) makes it unlawful “[t]o 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.” Under G.S. 90-108(b) a violation is a Class 1 misdemeanor. The felony grade is conditional, not automatic: it applies only where the criminal pleading alleges that the violation was committed intentionally and, upon trial, it is specifically found that it was committed intentionally, in which case “such violations shall be a Class I felony unless one of the following applies” – the subsection then setting out situations that are punished differently, among them a violation of subdivision (a)(7) by a person who also fortifies the structure with the intent to impede law-enforcement entry.

North Carolina appellate decisions read “keep or maintain” as requiring more than a single incident. The presence of drugs in a car or a room on one occasion is not the same as keeping the place for that purpose, and the court examines the totality of the circumstances – occupancy, how long the place was held, repeated activity, and whether substances were stored there rather than merely present. That is why the allegation turns on a timeline rather than on the single day of the arrest, and why what the State can show about the use of the place over time is the part of the count worth testing.

School zones, parks, minors and prior convictions raise the offense class itself

In North Carolina, G.S. 90-95(e) contains enhancements that operate on the offense class rather than on the sentence, and each is limited to the category it names. Under G.S. 90-95(e)(8), a person 21 years of age or older who commits an offense under G.S. 90-95(a)(1) on property used for a “child care center” or for an elementary or secondary school, or within 1,000 feet of the boundary of such property, “shall be punished as a Class E felon”. G.S. 90-95(e)(10) applies the same Class E treatment, and the same age requirement, to an offense under G.S. 90-95(a)(1) committed on a public park or within 1,000 feet of the boundary of a public park. Under G.S. 90-95(e)(5), a person 18 years of age or over who violates G.S. 90-95(a)(1) by selling or delivering a controlled substance to a person “under 16 years of age but more than 13 years of age or a pregnant female” is punished as a Class D felon. None of these reaches simple possession under G.S. 90-95(a)(3).

Prior convictions do separate work under the same subsection. G.S. 90-95(e)(3) provides that a person who commits a Class 1 misdemeanor under the Article, having previously been convicted of one or more offenses punishable under any provision of that Article, “shall be punished as a Class I felon”. G.S. 90-95(e)(7) escalates into a Class 2 misdemeanor an offense whose prescribed punishment otherwise requires that any sentence of imprisonment be suspended, on the same reasoning about prior convictions. Location does other work again: under G.S. 90-95(e)(9), a violation of G.S. 90-95(a)(3) on the premises of a penal institution or local confinement facility is a Class H felony. In a city as dense as Charlotte, where the 1,000-foot boundary falls is often the contested fact in the case.

Constructive possession is often the contested issue in a North Carolina drug case

In North Carolina, the State does not have to prove that drugs were on a person in order to prove possession. Constructive possession exists where a defendant, while not having actual possession, has the intent and capability to maintain control and dominion over the contraband – the formulation adopted in State v. Matias, 354 N.C. 549 (2001). Where the defendant has exclusive possession of the place in which the contraband was found, such as their own home or vehicle, that fact ordinarily permits the inference and is enough to carry the question to a jury. It permits the inference; it does not compel it.

Where control of the place is not exclusive, the rule changes. North Carolina appellate courts require the State to show other incriminating circumstances beyond mere proximity before constructive possession can go to a jury. Shared rooms, borrowed cars and vehicles with several occupants are the ordinary settings for that argument. Who sat where, who owned the vehicle, what was said, and what was within reach are the facts that carry the issue, and they are the facts a motion to dismiss at the close of the State’s evidence is built on.

Identity of the substance usually has to be proved by chemical analysis

In North Carolina, an officer’s opinion that a substance is cocaine or heroin is not by itself proof of its identity. In State v. Ward, 364 N.C. 133 (2010), the Supreme Court of North Carolina held that identifying pills as controlled substances by visual inspection alone was not a sufficiently reliable method for expert testimony, and that unless the State establishes before trial that another method of identification is sufficient to establish the identity of the alleged controlled substance beyond a reasonable doubt, some form of scientifically valid chemical analysis is required. The requirement is not universal. Ward was framed as a ruling under Rule 702 of the North Carolina Rules of Evidence on expert testimony, and marijuana, which is not defined by its chemical composition, has continued to be identified visually.

Where the State does rely on a laboratory report, G.S. 90-95(g) allows it to be admitted without the analyst appearing, but only on conditions the subsection spells out. The State must notify the defendant of its intention to introduce the report and provide a copy at least 15 business days before the proceeding, and the defendant must fail to file a written objection with the court, with a copy to the State, at least five business days before the proceeding. A timely objection restores the requirement that the analyst attend and be cross-examined. That mechanism matters in practice because laboratory work often is not complete when a case first appears in Mecklenburg County District Court. Field identifications, substance identifications and recorded weights can all change once the laboratory finishes, and in a trafficking case the recorded weight is the whole of the charge.

Where a Charlotte drug case is heard, and what pretrial release depends on

In North Carolina, misdemeanor drug charges are tried in district court, which under G.S. 7A-272(a) has, “[e]xcept as provided in this Article”, “exclusive, original jurisdiction for the trial of criminal actions, including municipal ordinance violations, below the grade of felony”. Felony drug charges are tried in superior court, which under G.S. 7A-271(a) has “exclusive, original jurisdiction over all criminal actions not assigned to the district court division by this Article”, subject to the same subsection’s list of misdemeanors the superior court may nonetheless try. Charges arising in Charlotte are heard in the Mecklenburg County courthouse, and a felony reaches superior court by indictment or by information where the defendant waives indictment.

Pretrial release carries a trafficking-specific rule, and it is conditional rather than automatic. G.S. 15A-533(d) creates “a rebuttable presumption that no condition of release will reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required and the safety of the community”, but only where a judicial official makes all three of the findings the subsection lists: that there is reasonable cause to believe the person committed an offense involving trafficking in a controlled substance; that the trafficking offense was committed while the person was on pretrial release for another offense; and that the person has previously been convicted of a Class A through E felony or a trafficking offense, with not more than five years elapsed since the date of that conviction or since release from prison for it, whichever is later. Absent all three findings the presumption never arises, and where it does arise it remains rebuttable.

A motion to suppress is the procedural center of many drug prosecutions

In North Carolina, G.S. 15A-974 provides that “[u]pon timely motion, evidence must be suppressed if” its “exclusion is required by the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution of the State of North Carolina”, or where “[i]t is obtained as a result of a substantial violation of the provisions of this Chapter”. The section withholds suppression under that second ground where the officer “acted under the objectively reasonable, good faith belief that the actions were lawful” – a limitation attached to the statutory ground, not to the constitutional one. Because drug evidence is nearly always the product of a stop, a search, a warrant or a consent, how it was obtained is frequently the whole case.

The procedure has form requirements. Under G.S. 15A-977(a), “[a] motion to suppress evidence in superior court made before trial must be in writing and a copy of the motion must be served upon the State”, the motion “must state the grounds upon which it is made”, and it “must be accompanied by an affidavit containing facts supporting the motion”. That affidavit “may be based upon personal knowledge, or upon information and belief, if the source of the information and the basis for the belief are stated”, and the State may file an answer admitting or denying the allegations. G.S. 15A-974 also directs the court to make “findings of fact and conclusions of law which shall be included in the record”, which is what makes a suppression ruling capable of review on appeal.

Felony drug sentences are set by offense class and prior record level

In North Carolina, a felony drug conviction is sentenced under structured sentencing rather than from a single statutory range. G.S. 15A-1340.17 sets out a chart on which offense class runs down the left side and prior record level, expressed in Roman numerals I through VI, runs across the top. The cell where the two meet states which dispositions are authorized – community, intermediate or active – and gives three ranges of minimum sentence: mitigated, presumptive and aggravated. A corresponding maximum term is then derived from the minimum actually imposed, by the method the same section prescribes for the class of felony in question.

Two consequences follow for drug cases. The same Class I felony possession charge produces materially different exposure depending on the prior record level calculated for the defendant, which is why the prior record worksheet repays as much attention as the elements. And the ranges are not freely available: the aggravated range may be used only where the court finds aggravating factors under G.S. 15A-1340.16, and the mitigated range only where it finds mitigating ones, the presumptive range applying otherwise. Trafficking is the exception to the whole scheme. The minimum and maximum terms in G.S. 90-95(h) are fixed by that subsection and do not move with prior record level unless the judge makes the findings that G.S. 90-95(h)(5) or G.S. 90-95(h)(5a) requires.

Conditional discharge, recovery court and expunction run alongside conviction

In North Carolina, conditional discharge under G.S. 90-96(a) is framed as a direction to the court rather than as a favor it may grant. Where a person who has not previously been convicted of a felony under state or federal law, of an offense under Article 5 of Chapter 90, or of a related offense under Articles 5A or 5B, pleads guilty to or is found guilty of misdemeanor possession of a controlled substance in Schedules I through VI, misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia under G.S. 90-113.22 or G.S. 90-113.22A, or a felony under G.S. 90-95(a)(3), the court “shall”, without entering a judgment of guilt and with the consent of the person, defer further proceedings and place the person on probation on such reasonable terms and conditions as it may require. The escape from that duty is a single, express one: unless the court determines “with a written finding, and with the agreement of the District Attorney, that the offender is inappropriate for a conditional discharge for factors related to the offense.” On fulfillment of the terms the court discharges the person and dismisses the proceedings; the discharge “shall not be deemed a conviction”, and it “may occur only once with respect to any person”.

Related mechanisms sit alongside it and are frequently confused with it. G.S. 90-96(a1) attaches to probation imposed on a first conviction a condition that the defendant enroll in and successfully complete, within 150 days, the program of instruction at the drug education school, a condition the court may waive on specific findings, such as that no drug education school is available within a reasonable distance. Judicially managed accountability and recovery courts operate under G.S. 7A-790, which provides that the Article “shall be known and may be cited as the ‘Judicially Managed Accountability and Recovery Court Act of 2021’”, and whose goals at G.S. 7A-792 include “[t]o reduce alcoholism and other substance abuse and dependencies among adult and juvenile offenders and defendants” and “[t]o reduce criminal and delinquent recidivism”. Separately, G.S. 15A-145.2(c) allows a first offender who was “not over 21 years of age at the time the offense” occurred to apply, no earlier than twelve months after the conviction, for cancellation of the judgment and expunction of the records, on a showing of good behavior since the conviction and completion of a drug education program approved for the purpose by the Department of Health and Human Services, which the court may waive on specific findings.

Property seized in a drug case is dealt with under its own statute

In North Carolina, G.S. 90-112 makes several categories of property subject to forfeiture under the Controlled Substances Act. They include the controlled substances themselves; all money, raw material, products and equipment acquired, used or intended for use in selling, purchasing, manufacturing or distributing them; property used or intended for use as a container for either; and “[a]ll conveyances, including vehicles, vessels, or aircraft, which are used or intended for use to unlawfully conceal, convey, or transport” a controlled substance. The conveyance category is expressly conditional. The section provides that no conveyance is forfeited unless the violation involved is a felony, so a conveyance connected only with a misdemeanor is outside it.

The section also recognizes interests other than the defendant’s. A conveyance used by a person as a common carrier in the transaction of business as a common carrier is not forfeited unless it appears that the owner or other person in charge was a consenting party or privy to the violation. No conveyance is forfeited by reason of an act or omission committed while the conveyance was unlawfully in the possession of a person other than the owner. And forfeiture of a conveyance encumbered by a bona fide security interest is subject to the interest of a secured party who had no knowledge of and did not consent to the violation. Money forfeited under the section is paid over by the law-enforcement agency holding it to the treasurer or other officer authorized to receive fines and forfeitures, to be used for the school fund of the county.

The overdose Good Samaritan provision gives immunity, but a narrow one

In North Carolina, G.S. 90-96.2 grants limited immunity from prosecution to a person who seeks medical assistance for someone experiencing a drug-related overdose. The immunity is confined to a defined list of offenses: a misdemeanor violation of G.S. 90-95(a)(3); a felony violation of that same subsection for possession of less than one gram of cocaine; a felony violation of it for possession of less than one gram of heroin; and a violation of G.S. 90-113.22. Offenses outside that list are untouched, and the section does not limit the authority of law enforcement to detain or arrest a person for another offense arising out of the same encounter.

The conditions are cumulative rather than alternative, and each has to be satisfied. The person must have sought the assistance by contacting the 911 system, a law enforcement officer or emergency medical services personnel; must have acted “in good faith” on a reasonable belief that they were the first to seek that assistance; must have provided their own name; must not have sought the assistance during the course of the execution of an arrest warrant, a search warrant or another lawful search; and the evidence for prosecution must have been obtained as a result of the person seeking the assistance. The immunity extends to the person who experienced the overdose where every one of those conditions except the giving of a name is satisfied. Where the immunity applies, the section also protects against arrest and against revocation of pretrial release, probation, parole or post-release supervision on the covered offenses.

Common questions

Written for North Carolina law and reviewed by David P. Sheehan, attorney, Charlotte. General information, not legal advice — see the disclaimer.