Case Summaries: Supreme Court of North Carolina (October 17, 2025)

This post summarizes the published criminal opinions released by the Supreme Court of North Carolina on October 17, 2025. Criminal defendants may not subpoena body camera footage and other recordings in the custody of law enforcement agencies; they must use the procedures set forth in G.S. 132-1.4A. State v. Chemuti, __ N.C. __ (Oct. 17, 2025) (Dietz). Mooresville officers arrested Charlotte Chemuti for resisting a public officer. Prior to trial, she served a subpoena on the police department for any pertinent BWC footage. The town responded in writing that it would not produce recordings except pursuant to the procedures set forth in G.S. 132-1.4A. A district court judge eventually ordered the town to produce any relevant recordings, reasoning that the procedure laid out in G.S. 132-1.4A provides one avenue for obtaining recordings but that a subpoena is also a valid means of compulsory process. The town appealed. The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal as premature. The town sought review in the Supreme Court of North Carolina, which determined that the appeal was timely. On the merits, the Supreme Court ruled that the statutory procedure in G.S. 132-1.4A “supplants the use of a subpoena and is now the exclusive means to obtain [agency] recordings for use in a criminal case.” Chemuti argued that a court-issued subpoena was a court order that satisfied the statute, but the Supreme Court said that in context, the only acceptable kind of order was one issued pursuant to G.S. 132-1.4A itself. Further, the court noted that [...]