Interlocutory appeal, substantial right, venue

Juror misconduct; trial court investigation; abuse of discretion;

Emergency order; emergency directives; COVID-19 order; criminal contempt; contemptuous act; willfulness of contempt

Fourth Amendment, warrantless search, plain smell, probable cause, motion to suppress, industrial hemp

Sex offenses;
Waiver of Indictment;
Waiver of Counsel;
Stand by Counsel;
Bill of Information;
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-642;
Proceeding Pro Se;
Plea agreement;
Waiver of costs and fees;

second-degree murder, juror substitution, warrantless search, electronic monitoring, Fourth Amendment

Default Judgment of Divorce;
Service of Process;
Appointed agent;
Rule 4;
Failure to appear;
Motion in the Cause;
Collateral attack;
No Rule 11 Motion;

Whether an interpretive rule in Orange County's zoning ordinances resolves any potential ambiguity between the applicable ordinance's text and a corresponding table.

Whether this Court can review issues raised in a Court of Appeals dissent that were not raised or argued by the parties.

Whether a developer was entitled to summary judgment on the negligence claims of a homeowner who suffered injury when she fell through her ceiling after stepping backwards in her attic without looking.

Summary judgment was proper in an eminent domain action when the trial court resolves all pleaded issues associated with property rights taken as of the date of the taking.

Whether Nationwide effectively cancelled plaintiffs' fire insurance policy in line with N.C.G.S. 58-44-16(f)(10).

Whether the Court of Appeals erred by reversing the trial court's adjudications of neglect and dependency and remanding for dismissal of the juvenile petitions.

Whether defendants' counterclaim alleged colorable constitutional claims under the Fruits of Their Labor Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the North Carolina Constitution sufficient to overcome the State's claim of sovereign immunity.

Defendant was properly indicted for multiple counts of human trafficking per victim. Further, although the trial court erred by failing to consider the substantial similarity of defendant's offenses pursuant to N.C.G.S. 15A-1340-14(e), the error did not prejudice defendant.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in reversing the trial court's denial of the defendant's motion to dismiss the charge of robbery with a dangerous weapon and in granting the defendant a new trial on the charge of first-degree murder.

Whether Chapter 17 of the General Statutes requires summary denial of an application to prosecute the writ of habeas corpus when the applicant is detained by virtue of a final judgment of a competent court of criminal jurisdiction.

Whether the trial court erred by instructing the jury that defendant did not have the right to use excessive force under the castle doctrine.