A traffic ticket can cause a lot of headache.  It starts with embarrassment when the blue lights come up in your rear view mirror and when you have to sit on the side of the road while the officer investigates and issues your ticket and it continues far beyond.  If you receive a traffic ticket, you should consult with an attorney on how to best handle your ticket.

After consulting with an attorney you may come to the crossroads where you have to choose to have your speeding ticket reduced to an Improper Equipment or to request a Prayer for Judgment Continued (PJC).

An improper equipment is a non-moving violation that carries no points with the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicle (NC DMV) and no insurance points.

It is possible to be charged with Improper Equipment, if there is actually something wrong with your vehicle.  Upon proof of the underlying deficiency of your vehicle being repaired, most Improper Equipment charges result in a dismissal.

A plea of responsible to operation of a vehicle with improper equipment in violation of N.C.G.S. §20-123.2 does not mean that there was something wrong with your vehicle, the North Carolina legislature specifically addressed the issue of improper equipment plea negotiations by making it a lesser included offense for most speeding violations N.C.G.S. §20-141 (o).  Pursuant to N.C.G.S. §20-141 (o) (2) however, an Improper Equipment plea shall not apply to charges of speeding in excess of 25 miles per hour or more over the posted speed limit.  Pursuant to N.C.G.S. §7A-304 (a) (4b) a defendant must pay an additional amount of $50 for all offenses arising under Chapter 20 of the General Statutes and resulting in a conviction of an improper equipment offense.

In some counties, such as New Hanover and Pender County, you are generally not allowed to get a Chapter 20 offense amended to an improper equipment more than once within a three year period without prior completion of a safe driving class.  If a defendant however already received an improper equipment plea and also already attended a safe driving class or if the defendant does not want to attend a safe driving class, then different options can be explored.  One of these options only applicable to speeding charges is a reduction of the speed, most commonly a reduction to less than ten over the posted speed limit. While a reduction to less than ten over the posted speed limit will appear on your driving record, it should not affect your North Carolina insurance premiums as long as the violation did not occur in a school zone or there is not another traffic moving violation within a three year period.

Another option of disposing of a traffic ticket pursuant to N.C.G.S. §15A-1381 (9) is a Prayer for Judgment Continued, or PJC – an entry of a plea of guilty or no contest pursuant to G.S. 15A-1011, without regard to the sentence imposed upon the plea. The PJC is unique to North Carolina Law.  If the PJC is granted, the offense is not entered against the defendant and no fines are assessed in addition to the court costs.  However, pursuant to N.C.G.S. §20-141 (p) a driver charged with speeding in excess of 25 miles per hour over the posted speed limit is not eligible for a PJC.  Also, defenders who hold an active Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) or who were driving a commercial vehicle when they were charged, cannot receive a PJC without it effecting their driving record because NC DMV does not recognized a PJC in such instances and would record a conviction of the underlying charge instead.

Both the NC DMV and Insurance Companies have their own policies regarding PJCs. Currently, the NC DMV will recognize two PJCs per driver every 5 years. If you plead guilty and are granted a third PJC within that 5 year period, DMV will not recognize it and the underlying conviction will affect you just like any other guilty plea. Also, Insurance Companies will recognize only one PJC every 3 years per household – a second PJC per household may cause insurance points to be charged according to the underlying conviction.

We generally advise our clients to save their PJCs. However, each defense in traffic matters is unique and needs to be analyzed to determine what the best possible disposition would be.

If you or someone you know is received a traffic ticket in Southeastern North Carolina, then call the experienced team at Collins Law Firm for a confidential consultation at:  910-793-9000.

By Jana H. Collins

Driving slowly in the left hand lane is not just a pet peeve, but causes a hazard by negatively impacting the flow of traffic.

This forces faster moving traffic to pass in the right hand lane. Drivers hoping to pass a slow left hand lane driver often signal a lane change toward the center median, flash headlights, or drive very close to the bumper to the slow left hand lane driver, which is known as tailgating.

The left hand lane which is also referred to as the fast lane, inside lane, or passing lane is reserved for faster moving vehicles wishing to pass or overtake. The United States Uniform Vehicle Code states the following: “Upon all roadways any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic.”

Some states, including North Carolina, have made it illegal to drive slowly in the left hand lane and fail to yield to traffic that seeks to overtake.

In North Carolina, travel on a multi-lane roadway is governed by N.C.G.S. §20-146(b):

Upon all highways any vehicle proceeding at less than the legal maximum speed limit shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for thru traffic, or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the highway, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn.

A violation of this law is an infraction pursuant to N.C.G.S. §20-176 (a) and if convicted, North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicle would assess 2 drivers license points pursuant to N.C.G.S. §20-16 (c), or 3drivers license points if the violation occurred during the operation of a commercial motor vehicle.

Most of the laws prohibiting driving slowly in the left hand lane however seem to only be enforced to stop suspicious vehicles or passengers.

Generally, one should always be aware of their surroundings especially while driving and move lanes if they find themselves holding up traffic – the choice to travel in the right hand lane should be made already out of consideration for other travelers, to increase traffic safety, to reduce traffic congestion, and to improve emergency response.

By Jana H. Collins, Office Manager

The Wilmington Star News recently reported that there are additional precautions in place for this year’s annual Fourth of July bash on Masonboro Island which will be focused on public safety. However, Richard Johnson founder of Masonboro.org, which is a volunteer organization dedicated to protect public access to the island, says as conservationists their group has solved the problem of leftover trash – by assuming responsibility for removing it.  Mr. Johnson said that the “amount of trash we picked up two years ago was 2,500 pounds. Last year, it was 4,000. . . . I don’t like it, but if the party is going to be there and the trash is going to be left behind, Masonboro.org is going to be there to clean it up.”

Trash and beer cans left on the island is the most visible remnant of the party, according to the Wilmington Star News (the Star News).  The annual event draws hundreds of revelers to the island each year. The Star News reported that many get to the festivities by hitching rides on boats with people they don’t know and are left stranded on the island after the party, with no way back to the mainland. Last year, nearly 1,500 people came to party, resulting in a handful of drunken fistfights and more than 130 injuries requiring medical attention.

Wilmington Star News reported that David Cignotti, mayor of Wrightsville Beach said:  “It’s important that all the agencies talk and coordinate, and that’s what we’ve attempted to do. . . . Adding additional police protection there will probably help temper some folks and some of their activities. We’re going to be getting out early, because a lot of folks will get picked up on Wrightsville Beach and transported over, and we’re going to crack down on that activity. . . .  To take money and take people over there, you need a business license from the town, and you should not be using our public parks to take people over there.”

If the stepped up preventative efforts fail to alleviate the problems despite the outreach efforts and increased security, state agencies may pursue other control measures. Masonboro.org members have bristled at the possibility of new regulations for reserve sites that could change the way residents are able to use the island, saying that people who visit the shore responsibly shouldn’t be punished for the antics of out-of-towners occurring on one day each year.  Collins Law Firm agrees. “We heard resoundingly from our membership that they felt they shouldn’t be penalized,” Johnson said. “We really are pretty passionate about keeping things the way they are.”

The local paper at Wrightsville Beach, The Lumina News reported that water taxis transporting revelers to Masonboro Island for the Fourth of July will be under increased scrutiny this year as the Wrightsville Beach Police Department hopes to eradicate private individuals from operating illegal water taxis.

The Lumina News reported that in the past, Wrightsville Beach Police Chief Dan House said that “when boaters offer to carry passengers to and from private and public docks around Wrightsville Beach to Masonboro Island in exchange for money it contributes to the issues on both islands . . . [and] that he thinks the situation will be better managed than last year. . . . That bleed-over that we get from Masonboro is what we are trying to shut down. . . . [p]eople come back over here, usually drunk and causing problems so we are going to really focus on the water taxis.”

Wrightsville Beach Town Manager Tim Owens indicated that the Town has not issued any business licenses for water taxis anyone operating a taxi will be in violation of a town ordinance. Also the United States Coast Guard could charge operators in violation with federal law if they don’t have a captain’s license. Chief House reportedly said that his officers did not begin patrolling the docks and actively searching for water taxis until around 11 a.m. after which time many partiers had already been ferried to the island.

The Lumina News reported that this year a command center will be set up at the United States Coast Guard Station at Wrightsville Beach comprised of representatives from the Wrightsville Beach Police Department, the Wrightsville Beach Fire Department, the Wrightsville Beach Ocean Rescue, the Wilmington Police Department, the New Hanover County Sheriff’s Office, the New Hanover County Emergency Management, the New Hanover County Fire Department and the New Hanover Regional Emergency Medical Services. From the command center, Chief House indicated that all organizations involved would be able to more effectively deal with unruly situations that may arise on Masonboro Island.

Chief House also said that on the Wrightsville Beach strand, he expects more citations for alcohol and glass on the beach to be issued. The Lumina News wrote that Chief House said due to the increased signage indicating the prohibition of glass and other banned substances: “There is no way anyone can walk out on the beach without seeing it,” he said. “If they come from a private residence they could say that but … we are going to be reluctant to uphold any appeals if their excuse is, ‘I didn’t know.’”

Illegal fireworks are also a typical issue for law enforcement to deal with on the Fourth of July evenings. Chief House said that this year his department would be working with officers from the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and the District Attorney’s office to increase law enforcement to stop the use of such fireworks on the Fourth of July.   The Lumina News reported that Chief House said “Our policy in the past has been to go over there, ask whose fireworks they are and nine times out of 10 nobody claims them so we seize them, because they are illegal, and turn everything over to ATF,” he said. “There are certain areas we know have fireworks on the island that we have had problems with; and we have already spoken with either the homeowners or businesses and let them know … just to give them a fair warning so hopefully it will go better than it has in the past.”

The Fourth of July is America’s Birthday.  On July 4th, 1776, our founding fathers formally executed the Declaration of Independence, which formally declared the revolt and refusal to submit to the abusive exercise of authority of our previous supreme ruler:  Great Britain.  The Declaration of Independence in its conclusion proclaimed:  We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Today’s events are part of our country’s celebration of the founding of our country.  Today is the 237th anniversary of the our Declaration of Independence from Great Britain.

In response to the recent reports of dramatically increased efforts by law enforcement and other organizations to put an end to the rowdy celebrations on Masonboro Island during, and presumably more specifically to the threat of imposition of regulations restricting access to the island, Richard Johnson, the founder of Masonboro.org, wrote a letter to the editor of the Wilmington Star News which was published in late June, 2013.  Here is a reprint of Mr. Johnson’s letter the editor:

In the recent article about officials cracking down on the annual island bash, state officials made some key points that could shape public opinion. Unfortunately, these points were just not true. The first one states that the party wreaks havoc on the island … not true. The party takes place on a small spit of land on the north end that represents less than .01 percent of the island. The second point mentions heaps of trash scooped up the next day by Coastal Reserve staff members. For the last three years, Masonboro.org has handed out trash bags and removed trash during the party. When the party is over, the trash is gone. There are no huge piles of trash left behind. Last year over 50 Masonboro.org members – with the help of Waste Management – removed and recycled 4,000 pounds of trash. I am also skeptical about the mention of 130 injuries. Our volunteers only saw a handful of people seeking out medical attention. Most of these were from stepping on oyster shells.  Finally, we take issue with the statement: “This is the last place this type of activity should be occurring.” While we are not a big fan of the party, we are passionate about keeping the island open to the public. The overwhelming majority of the kids over there behave as good citizens. Those who break a law while on the island should be removed and arrested.  When state officials present misleading facts that could shape public opinion against public access, it is an injustice to all the people who use the island responsibly all year long.  By:  Richard Johnson, Wilmington

Collins Law Firm supports the efforts of Masonboro.org, and encourages everyone to behave and party responsibly and safely not only on the Fourth of July, but always.  However, if you or someone you know receive a traffic ticket or get charged with a crime in or around Wilmington, NC in New Hanover County, Brunswick County (Bolivia, NC), or Pender County (Burgaw, NC) call Collins Law Firm at: 910-793-9000910-793-9000 for a confidential consultation.

Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death among those age 5-34 in the U.S. More than 2.3 million drivers and passengers were treated in emergency departments as the result of being injured in motor vehicle crashes in 2009. Seat belt use and proper child restraint are the most effective ways to save lives and reduce injuries in crashes, yet millions of adults do not wear their seat belts and fail to properly secure their children on every car ride. Many of these deaths and injuries can be prevented.  Placing children in age- and size-appropriate car seats and booster seats reduces serious and fatal injuries by more than half.

According to North Carolina General Statute § 20-137.1 (Child restraint systems required)

(a) Every driver who is transporting one or more passengers of less than 16 years of age shall have all such passengers properly secured in a child passenger restraint system or seat belt which meets federal standards applicable at the time of its manufacture.
(a1) A child less than eight years of age and less than 80 pounds in weight shall be properly secured in a weight-appropriate child passenger restraint system. In vehicles equipped with an active passenger-side front air bag, if the vehicle has a rear seat, a child less than five years of age and less than 40 pounds in weight shall be properly secured in a rear seat, unless the child restraint system is designed for use with air bags. If no seating position equipped with a lap and shoulder belt to properly secure the weight-appropriate child passenger restraint system is available, a child less than eight years of age and between 40 and 80 pounds may be restrained by a properly fitted lap belt only.

A violation of this section shall have all of the following consequences:

(1) Two drivers license points shall be assessed pursuant to G.S. § 20-16.
(2) No insurance points shall be assessed.
(3) The violation shall not constitute negligence per se or contributory negligence per se.

For maximum safety and to avoid being charged with failing to restrain a child, follow these recommendations provided by www.buckleupnc.org:
•    Use rear facing child restraints as long as possible, but at least until age two. Most models can and should be used up to at least 30 pounds.
•    Once a child is turned to face the front of the car, use a child restraint with a harness until the harness is outgrown, from 40-80 pounds, depending on the model.
•    Use seatbelts for older children only when they are large enough for both the lap and shoulder belt to fit correctly.
•    Use a seatbelt on every car trip to set a good example for your children.

If you have been charged for failing to restrain a child, for a seatbelt violation  or if you have legal concerns about any area of law in which we practice, contact us at (910) 793-9000(910) 793-9000 for a confidential legal consultation.

By Lauren Seidel, Paralegal

The holiday season is in full swing and so is the North Carolina “Booze It & Lose It” Campaign, created by State Transportation Secretary Gene Conti in an effort to remove impaired drivers from the road and keep our citizens safe. Checkpoints and increased patrol began on December 6th and will continue through January 2, 2013, to help reduce the rising number of alcohol related crashes, injuries and fatalities state wide.

Driving while under the influence is a violation of North Carolina General Statute § 20-138.1

N.C.G.S. § 20-138.1.  Impaired driving.
(a)        Offense. – A person commits the offense of impaired driving if he drives any vehicle upon any highway, any street, or any public vehicular area within this State:
(1)        While under the influence of an impairing substance; or
(2)        After having consumed sufficient alcohol that he has, at any relevant time after the driving, an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more. The results of a chemical analysis shall be deemed sufficient evidence to prove a person’s alcohol concentration; or
(3)        With any amount of a Schedule I controlled substance, as listed in G.S. 90-89, or its metabolites in his blood or urine.
(a1)      A person who has submitted to a chemical analysis of a blood sample, pursuant to G.S. 20-139.1(d), may use the result in rebuttal as evidence that the person did not have, at a relevant time after driving, an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more.

Last year, 3,600 North Carolina Drivers were charged with DUI / DWI during the month long holiday campaign and that number is expected to increase this year. Not only does drinking and driving put you at risk of getting arrested at a checkpoint or during a traffic stop, it puts your life and the lives of others in danger.  In fact, drunk drivers with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.08, the legal limit, are 11 times more likely than a sober driver to be in a motor vehicle accident. This likelihood increases with the increase of the BAC level.  With odds like that, why risk it?

In 2011, there were more than 950 alcohol related crashes in North Carolina during the “Booze It & Lose It” Campaign spanning from December 3rd – January 3rd. Those 950 crashes resulted in 44 fatalities and 702 injuries- some of which were innocent victims and not the drunk driver themselves.

If you find yourself questioning weather you had too much eggnog at your office holiday party, don’t risk getting arrested or worse, endangering your life or the lives of others. Play it safe and call a cab or have a sober friend take you home.  If you or someone you know have any legal needs this holiday season call Collins Law Firm at (910) 793- 9000(910) 793- 9000.

By Lauren Seidel, Paralegal

Every year, court costs increase, but this year is different.  With the new republican controlled legislature and the budget crisis, the government is looking to increase revenue and it seems they have looked to court costs.  While in the past, there have been nominal increase – usually once a year, this year there have been two already, and another one set to hit later this year.

The court costs for an improper equipment violation (a non moving violation to which many traffic offenses may be reduced to avoid both DMV points and insurance points) increased effective October 1, 2010 from $161 to $166.  On July 1, 2011 court costs went up for an improper equipment (IE) from $166 to $195. And effective August 1, 2011 court costs for an IE went up from $195 to $263.

Not only are the costs increasing, but they are becoming more complex!  The amount of the court costs in a criminal case now depends on the class or type of crime alleged.  The costs are different for infractions and misdemeanors, and different for chapter 20 violations (traffic violations) and other crimes.  Check out the official documents giving notice of the changes and the charts provided to explain the costs and how to calculate them:  http://www.nccourts.org/Courts/Trial/Costs/Default.asp

In addition to the changes and increases, the lack of advance notice have been especially frustrating. For example, look at the at the 2011 Court Costs Memo – effective July 1, 2011 in the list of documents at the AOC link above. The date of the memo is: June 28, 2011, and it refers to:  “Legislative Increases in Court Costs and Fees, July 2011; EFFECTIVE July 1, 2011, unless otherwise noted.”

These changes have not only been costly to our clients but they have also been very confusing and cumbersome to everyone involved!  The staff in the courts have been expressing frustration, understandably so, including some of the clerks and the District Attorneys’ staff.  Even some of the judges have been making comments about the changes and uncertainty associated with the changes and the implementation thereof.

When Americans get into their car for their commute to work, to drop the kids off for school, or for any other reason, they are likely to either talk on their cell phone or use text messaging. Just this morning when our summer intern drove the 55 miles from Sunset Beach, NC (Brunswick County) to Wilmington, NC (New Hanover County) on Highway 17 passing through Ocean Isle and Bolivia, he told me he counted twenty-two people who were texting on their cell phone.

Texting while driving is quite dangerous for three reasons: 1) You are taking your eyes of the road; 2) You are taking your hands off the wheel; and 3) You are taking your mind off what you’re doing.  A study released by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute found that truck drivers who were texting were 23 times more at risk of a crash or a near crash event than drivers who were not distracted.  Additionally, the study found that texting took a driver’s focus away from the road for an average of 4.6 seconds, which is enough time to travel the length of a football field at 55 mph.

Studies like these have caused state legislatures across the country to pass legislation banning text messaging while driving. In June 2009, the North Carolina Governor signed new legislation, § 20-137.4A, which banned text messaging by all drivers who operate a vehicle on a public street, highway, or public vehicular area.  This bill makes it unlawful to read email, text message, use your camera, or look up information on the internet.  However, the law has a number of exceptions where it does not apply: 1) If you are parked, 2) If you are a law enforcement officer, a member of a fire department, or the operator of a public or private ambulance; 3) If you are using a factory-installed or aftermarket GPS or wireless communications devices used to transmit or receive data as part of a digital dispatch system; and 4) If you are using a voice operated technology.

Since December 1, 2009, a violation of this law shall be an infraction and shall be punishable by a fine of $100 plus court fees.  The violation will not add points to your driving record and an insurance surcharge will not be assessed.  Additionally, failure to comply with the provisions shall not constitute negligence per se or contributory negligence per se by the operator in any action for the recovery of damages arising out of the operation of a vehicle.

The new law is quite difficult to enforce.  WWAY News Channel 3 reported that Wilmington Police Chief Ralph Evangelous said, “You assume that someone’s texting, when in fact they could just be dialing a phone number, which technically is legal.”  In the first six months of the new law only 300 tickets had been given to drivers in North Carolina.  In New Hanover County only 12 had been issued.  The Wilmington Police Chief believes the law is “dumb” and said, “we ought to ban the use of cell phones – period.”

If you have been issued a citation because you were texting while driving, or have been charged with any other traffic violation or crime in Southeastern North Carolina, in Wilmington, NC, New Hanover County, or the surrounding areas including Bolivia, NC, Brunswick County, Burgaw, NC, or Pender County, you should contact a lawyer or attorney at Collins Law Firm at 910-793-9000 for a consultation.

Recently, the North Carolina Legislature enacted S.L. 2011-2 (H 18), which clarifies the effective date of the law authorizing restoration of firearms rights under certain circumstances.   This bill amends the effective date of S.L. 2010-108 (H 126), (codified as  § 14-415.4. Restoration of firearms rights), which allows people convicted of nonviolent felonies to apply for restoration of the right to possess firearms and creates an exception from firearms restrictions for white collar felony convictions.  The 2010 act contained a standard effective-date clause used in criminal law legislation—that is, that the act applied to offenses committed on or after a particular date, in this instance February 1, 2011.  This wording created some question whether the restoration procedure and exception applied to a person who committed an offense before that date.  The 2011 amendment clarifies that the restoration procedure and exception takes effect February 1, 2011.  Thus, whether the offense date is before or after February 11, a person is eligible for restoration of firearm rights if he or she was convicted of a nonviolent felony as defined in G.S. 14-415.4, completed his or her sentence at least twenty years ago, and otherwise meets the requirements for restoration.  The act is effective March 5, 2011.
The text of the Act, specifying the criteria under which the rights may be restored, is:  Article 54A.  The Felony Firearms Act;  § 14-415.4.   Restoration of firearms rights:
(a) Definitions. – The following definitions apply in this section: (1) Firearms rights. – The legal right in this State of a person to purchase, own, possess, or have in the person’s custody, care, or control any firearm or any weapon of mass death and destruction as those terms are defined in G.S. 14-415.1 and G.S. 14-288.8(c).  The term does not include any weapon defined in G.S. 14-409(a). (2) Nonviolent felony. – The term nonviolent felony does not include any felony that is a Class A, Class B1, or Class B2 felony.  Also, the term nonviolent felony does not include any Class C through Class I felony that is one of the following:  a.  An offense that includes assault as an essential element of the offense.  b.  An offense that includes the possession or use of a firearm or other deadly weapon as an essential or nonessential element of the offense, or the offender was in possession of a firearm or other deadly weapon at the time of the commission of the offense.  c.  An offense for which the offender was armed with or used a firearm or other deadly weapon.  d.  An offense for which the offender must register under Article 27A of Chapter 14 of the General Statutes.  (b) Purpose. – It is the purpose of this section to establish a procedure that allows a North Carolina resident who was convicted of a single nonviolent felony and whose citizenship rights have been restored pursuant to Chapter 13 of the General Statutes to petition the court to remove the petitioner’s dis-entitlement under G.S. 14-415.1 and to restore the person’s firearms rights in this State.  If the single nonviolent felony conviction was an out-of-state conviction or a federal conviction, then the North Carolina resident shall show proof of the restoration of his or her civil rights and the right to possess a firearm in the jurisdiction where the conviction occurred.  Restoration of a person’s firearms rights under this section means that the person may purchase, own, possess, or have in the person’s custody, care, or control any firearm or any weapon of mass death and destruction as those terms are defined in G.S. 14-415.1 and G.S. 14-288.8(c) without being in violation of G.S. 14-415.1, if otherwise qualified.  (c) Petition for Restoration of Firearms Rights.  – A person who was convicted of a nonviolent felony in North Carolina but whose civil rights have been restored pursuant to Chapter 13 of the General Statutes for a period of at least 20 years may petition the district court in the district where the person resides to restore the person’s firearms rights pursuant to this section.  A person who was convicted of a nonviolent felony in a jurisdiction other than North Carolina may petition the district court in the district where the person resides to restore the person’s firearms rights pursuant to this section only if the person’s civil rights, including the right to possess a firearm, have been restored, pursuant to the law of the jurisdiction where the conviction occurred, for a period of at least 20 years.  The court may restore a petitioner’s firearms rights after a hearing in court if the court determines that the petitioner meets the criteria set out in this section and is not otherwise disqualified to have that right restored.
(d) Criteria.  – The court may grant a petition to restore a person’s firearms rights under this section if the petitioner satisfies all of the following criteria and is not otherwise disqualified to have that right restored:  (1) The petitioner is a resident of North Carolina and has been a resident of the State for one year or longer immediately preceding the filing of the petition.  (2) The petitioner has only one felony conviction and that conviction is for a nonviolent felony.  For purposes of this subdivision, multiple felony convictions arising out of the same event and consolidated for sentencing shall count as one felony only.  (3) The petitioner’s rights of citizenship have been restored pursuant to Chapter 13 of the General Statutes or, if the conviction was in a jurisdiction other than North Carolina, have been restored, pursuant to the laws of the jurisdiction where the conviction occurred, for a period of at least 20 years before the date of the filing of the petition.  (4) The petitioner has not been convicted under the laws of the United States, the laws of this State, or the laws of any other state of any misdemeanor as described in subdivision (6) of subsection (e) of this section since the conviction of the nonviolent felony.  (5) The petitioner submits his or her fingerprints to the sheriff of the county in which the petitioner resides for a criminal background check pursuant to G.S. 114-19.28.  (6) The petitioner is not disqualified under subsection (e) of this section.
If you live in Southeastern North Carolina (Brunswick, New Hanover, or Pender Counties) and think you qualify for restoration of your right to bear firearms and are interested in having your rights restored, call Collins Law Firm for a consultation at:   910-793-9000.