Provided the underlying charges that form the basis for an order for arrest (OFA) for failure to appear remain unresolved at the time the OFA is executed, the OFA is not invalid and an arrest made pursuant to it is not unconstitutional merely because a clerk or judicial official failed to recall the OFA after learning that it was issued erroneously. On February 22, 2007, the defendant was cited to appear in Wilkes County Court for various motor vehicle offenses (“Wilkes County charges”). On June 7, 2007 he was convicted in Caldwell County of unrelated charges (“unrelated charges”) and sent to prison. When a court date was set on the Wilkes County charges, the defendant failed to appear because he was still in prison on the unrelated charges and no writ was issued to secure his presence. The court issued an OFA for the failure to appear. When the defendant was scheduled to be released from prison on the unrelated charges, DOC employees asked the Wilkes County clerk’s office to recall the OFA, explaining defendant had been incarcerated when it was issued. However, the OFA was not recalled and on October 1, 2007, the defendant was arrested pursuant to that order, having previously been released from prison. When he was searched incident to arrest, officers found marijuana and cocaine on his person. The court rejected the defendant’s argument that the OFA was invalid because the Wilkes County clerk failed to recall it as requested, concluding that because the underlying charges had not been resolved at the time of arrest, no automatic recall occurred. The court further noted that even if good cause to recall existed, recall was not mandatoryand therefore failure to recall did not nullify the OFA. Thus, the officers were entitled to rely on it, and no independent probable cause was required to arrest the defendant. The court declined to resolve the issue of whether there is a good faith exception to Article I, Section 20 of the state Constitution.