Remand to determine whether Randolph violation is harmless

Case remanded to determine whether Randolph violation was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. McDougald, 362 N.C. 224, 657 S.E.2d 351 (2008), revg State v. McDougald, 181 N.C. App. 41, 638 S.E.2d 546 (2007):

Defendant appeals to this Court from the decision of the Court of Appeals on the basis of a dissent. In light of the State’s concession of error, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals as to the appealable issue of right i.e. whether it was appropriate to dismiss defendant’s appeal on procedural grounds. The case is remanded to the Court of Appeals to determine if any error under Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103, 126 S. Ct. 1515, 164 L. Ed. 2d 208 (2006) was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The remaining issues addressed by the Court of Appeals are not before this Court and its decision as to these issues remains undisturbed.

Fact questions remained on whether use of a police dog in arresting plaintiff precludes summary judgment. Ohlsen v. County of San Joaquin, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20110 (E.D. Cal. March 13, 2008).*

Plaintiffs were arrested in Miami Beach for walking a dog without a plastic bag in hand when they refused to sign a ticket. They stated enough to stay in court. Reyes v. City of Miami Beach, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20087 (S.D. Fla. March 13, 2008).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.