{
  "id": 12208455,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. QUINTEL AUGUSTINE, TILMON GOLPHIN, AND CHRISTINA WALTERS",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Augustine",
  "decision_date": "2015-12-15",
  "docket_number": "No. 139PA13",
  "first_page": "594",
  "last_page": "595",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "368 N.C. 594"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 182,
    "char_count": 2132,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.71,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.621887471290392e-08,
      "percentile": 0.2903144160142155
    },
    "sha256": "e2a1f0f0606276368924eac65e6b6a6c7a93fd04a5d9aa5387b3b0fa9e1e11af",
    "simhash": "1:a06d333e076c2bf6",
    "word_count": 338
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:54:29.404016+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Justice BEASLEY and Justice ERVIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of these cases."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. QUINTEL AUGUSTINE, TILMON GOLPHIN, AND CHRISTINA WALTERS"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "ORDER\nThe trial court granted respondents\u2019 motions for appropriate relief under the Racial Justice Act, N.C.G.S. \u00a7\u00a7 15A-2010 to -2012 (2009) and N.C.G.S. \u00a7\u00a7 15A-2010 to -2012 (2011 & Supp. 2012). After careful review, we conclude that the error recognized in this Court\u2019s Order in State v. Robinson, _ N.C. _, _S.E.2d _ (2015) (411A94-5), infected the trial court\u2019s decision, including its use of issue preclusion, in these cases. Accordingly, the trial court\u2019s order is vacated. Furthermore, the trial court erred when it joined these three cases for an evidentiary hearing. These cases are therefore remanded to the senior resident superior court judge of Cumberland County for reconsideration of respondents\u2019 motions for appropriate relief. Cf. Gen. R. Pract. Super. & Dist. Cts. 25(4), 2016 Ann. R. N.C. 22.\nWe express no opinion on the merits of respondents\u2019 motions for appropriate relief at this juncture. On remand, the trial court should address petitioner\u2019s constitutional and statutory challenges pertaining to the Act. In any new hearings on the merits, the trial court may, in the interest of justice, consider additional statistical studies presented by the parties. The trial court may also, in its discretion, appoint an expert under N.C. R. Evid. 706 to conduct a quantitative and qualitative study, unless such a study has already been commissioned pursuant to this Court\u2019s Order in Robinson, in which case the trial court may consider that study. If the trial court appoints an expert under Rule 706, the Court hereby orders the Administrative Office of the Courts to make funds available for that purpose.\nBy order of the Court in Conference, this 15th day of December, 2015.\ns/Jackson. J.\nFor the Court\nJustice BEASLEY and Justice ERVIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of these cases.\nWITNESS my hand and the seal of the Supreme Court of North Carolina, this 18th day of December, 2015\nCHRISTIE S. CAMERON ROEDER Clerk of the Supreme Court\ns/M.C. Hacknev Assistant Clerk",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "s/Jackson. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. QUINTEL AUGUSTINE, TILMON GOLPHIN, AND CHRISTINA WALTERS\nFrom Cumberland County\nNo. 139PA13"
  },
  "file_name": "0594-01",
  "first_page_order": 744,
  "last_page_order": 745
}