Supreme Court Un-"Capps" Amendments

A few months ago, Jamie Markham summarized the North Carolina Supreme Court's decision in State v. Capps, 374 N.C. 621 (2020), affirming the procedure used by the state to cure a defect with the name of the victim in larceny and injury to personal property charges. The higher court's decision reversed the Court of Appeals ruling in State v. Capps, 265 N.C. App. 491 (2019), a case that Jeff Welty blogged about here. The more recent Capps case is one that I have found myself mentioning over and over again during presentations on pleadings, amendments, and legal updates, so I thought we should close the loop on those earlier blog posts by digging a little deeper into its holding. Procedurally, Capps is a significant and helpful case for the state, but it remains to be seen how one aspect of the decision will be reconciled with existing case law. Facts and Procedural History: A more detailed and colorful summary of the facts of the case can be found in prior posts here and here. Briefly, the defendant got into an argument with a passenger in his vehicle while at a truck stop, cut the end off an air pump hose and used it to assault the passenger, and then fled the scene when confronted by an officer. The defendant pleaded guilty to several charges in district court, including larceny and injury to personal property charged by warrant, and appealed to superior court. Before his trial in superior court, the state moved [...]