{
  "id": 9081566,
  "name": "IN THE MATTER OF: ANTHONY BRAITHWAITE",
  "name_abbreviation": "In re Braithwaite",
  "decision_date": "2002-05-21",
  "docket_number": "No. COA01-832",
  "first_page": "434",
  "last_page": "436",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "150 N.C. App. 434"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Ct. App.",
    "id": 14983,
    "name": "North Carolina Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "272 S.E.2d 861",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1981,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "870"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "301 N.C. 532",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8569752
      ],
      "year": 1981,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "547"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/301/0532-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "290 S.E.2d 688",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1982,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "690"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "305 N.C. 565",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8571464
      ],
      "year": 1982,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "569"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/305/0565-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "545 S.E.2d 728",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2000,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "352 N.C. 674",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        684995,
        685061,
        685094,
        685032,
        684918
      ],
      "year": 2000,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/352/0674-05",
        "/nc/352/0674-01",
        "/nc/352/0674-03",
        "/nc/352/0674-04",
        "/nc/352/0674-02"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "530 S.E.2d 76",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 2000,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "78"
        },
        {
          "page": "78"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "138 N.C. App. 542",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        11080743
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 2000,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "545"
        },
        {
          "page": "545"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/138/0542-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 261,
    "char_count": 4712,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.765,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.0446031217563963e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7497718978982945
    },
    "sha256": "33abc69bf030a33f2b973228f82455291d18562ee2bde78f3a36db423b807cfb",
    "simhash": "1:aee2aeef742b807c",
    "word_count": 801
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:52:10.836930+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges TIMMONS-GOODSON and HUNTER concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "IN THE MATTER OF: ANTHONY BRAITHWAITE"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "GREENE, Judge.\nDurham County (the County) appeals a juvenile order filed 16 March 2001 and an amended juvenile order dated 26 March 2001 ordering it to pay the costs of Anthony Braithwaite\u2019s (Braithwaite) residential treatment.\nBraithwaite was first adjudicated delinquent on 28 March 2000 for. felony breaking and entering and felony larceny and again on 9 February 2001 for assault. Subsequently, on 16 March 2001, the trial court determined Braithwaite was in need of residential treatment for a mental illness and substance abuse. After finding Braithwaite\u2019s mother unable to afford the cost of her son\u2019s treatment, the trial court ordered the County to \u201cpay the costs of [Braithwaite\u2019s] residential treatment and that the . . . mother . . . contribute $100 monthly to the [C]ounty for her son\u2019s treatment.\u201d\nOn 2 April 2001, the County filed its notice of appeal and on 29 June 2001, filed a petition for writ of certiorari.\nThe dispositive issue is whether this Court has the right to grant a writ of certiorari and review the trial court\u2019s orders in this case.\nA trial court may order a county \u201cto arrange for evaluation or treatment of [a] juvenile and to pay for the cost of the evaluation or treatment.\u201d N.C.G.S. \u00a7 7B-2502(b) (1999). While a county must be given notice and an opportunity to be heard before an order to pay costs can be issued, id., a county does not have a \u201cstatutory right to appeal in a juvenile proceeding in this state,\u201d In re Voight, 138 N.C. App. 542, 545, 530 S.E.2d 76, 78, disc. review denied, cert. denied, and remedial writ denied, 352 N.C. 674, 545 S.E.2d 728 (2000); In re Wharton, 305 N.C. 565, 569, 290 S.E.2d 688, 690 (1982); In re Brownlee, 301 N.C. 532, 547, 272 S.E.2d 861, 870 (1981). Although Brownlee and Wharton held that a county does not have a right to appeal in a juvenile delinquency action, our Supreme Court exercised its power under the N.C. Constitution, Article IV, Section 12(1) and issued a remedial writ to hear the appeals. Voight, 138 N.C. App. at 545, 530 S.E.2d at 78. This Court, however, \u201cdoes not have the power to issue a remedial writ under our Constitution\u201d but does \u201chave the power to issue certain prerogative writs under N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 7A-32 (1999).\u201d Id. One of these prerogative writs is certiorari. N.C.G.S. \u00a7 7A-32(c) (1999). This Court has authority to issue a writ of certiorari only\nin appropriate circumstances ... to permit review of the judgments and orders of trial tribunals when the right to prosecute an appeal has been lost by failure to take timely action, or when no right of appeal from an interlocutory order exists, or for review pursuant to G.S. 15A-1422(c)(3) of an order of the trial court denying a motion for appropriate relief.\nN.C.R. App. P. 21(a)(1).\nIn this case, the County has not failed to take timely action, is not attempting to appeal from an interlocutory order, and is not seeking review pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 15A-1422(c)(3). Thus, this Court does not have the authority to issue a writ of certiorari pursuant to Rule 21(a)(1). Accordingly, because the County does not have a right to appeal and this Court is without authority to issue remedial writs or grant a writ of certiorari under the circumstances of this case, the County\u2019s appeal is dismissed.\nDismissed.\nJudges TIMMONS-GOODSON and HUNTER concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "GREENE, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Special Deputy Attorney General Mabel Y Bullock, for the State.",
      "County Attorney S.C. Kitchen, by Deputy Durham County Attorney Lowell L. Siler and Assistant Durham County Attorneys Curtis 0. Massey, II, and Lucy Chavis, for respondent-appellant, Durham County.",
      "Phillip W. Evans, for respondent-appellee, juvenile."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "IN THE MATTER OF: ANTHONY BRAITHWAITE\nNo. COA01-832\n(Filed 21 May 2002)\nJuveniles\u2014 county\u2019s right to appeal in juvenile proceedings\u2014 writ of certiorari\nThe county\u2019s appeal from a juvenile order filed 16 March 2001 and an amended juvenile order dated 26 March 2001 ordering it to pay the costs of a juvenile delinquent\u2019s residential treatment for mental illness and substance abuse is dismissed, because: (1) the county does not have a right to appeal in a juvenile proceeding in North Carolina; and (2) the Court of Appeals is without authority to issue remedial writs or grant a writ of certiorari under the circumstances of this case when the county has not failed to take timely action, the county is not attempting to appeal from an interlocutory order, and the county is not seeking review under N.C.G.S. \u00a7 15A-1422(c)(3).\nAppeal by respondent-appellant from order filed 16 March 2001 and from amended order dated 26 March 2001 by Judge Marcia H. Morey in Durham County District Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 16 April 2002.\nAttorney General Roy Cooper, by Special Deputy Attorney General Mabel Y Bullock, for the State.\nCounty Attorney S.C. Kitchen, by Deputy Durham County Attorney Lowell L. Siler and Assistant Durham County Attorneys Curtis 0. Massey, II, and Lucy Chavis, for respondent-appellant, Durham County.\nPhillip W. Evans, for respondent-appellee, juvenile."
  },
  "file_name": "0434-01",
  "first_page_order": 464,
  "last_page_order": 466
}