The eCourt of Public Opinion

The introduction of eCourts was supposed to make life easier for both courthouse officials and the public.

Instead, there’s a fight brewing about the transition from paper to electronic filings throughout the state court system as some places that are not yet on eCourts call for a pause on rollout. And an updated lawsuit filed in federal court alleges that people were jailed in Mecklenburg County longer than they should have been because of problems with the rollout there.

The North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) proudly launched eCourts in Mecklenburg County on October 9, 2023. Previous trial runs of the long-delayed, $100 million digital records system in four pilot counties—Lee, Harnett, Johnston, and Wake—had been plagued with enough problems to prompt a class-action lawsuit alleging that people either spent days or weeks longer than necessary in jail, or were arrested multiple times on the same warrant.

Court officials have since added 12 additional counties to the system, with plans to have the whole state online by 2025.

It took just four days for similar problems to surface in Mecklenburg, according to an amended federal lawsuit filed February 28. In that time period, the lawsuit alleges, 66 people were detained in the Mecklenburg County Jail far beyond the time when they should have been released. 

According to the suit, this was due to an “integration issue” between eWarrants, an online warrant depository, and Odyssey, the cloud-based integrated case management system. Three plaintiffs claim they were held overnight, even though they either posted bond or a judge ordered that they be released. Two of the inmates were held for more than 24 hours beyond the time when they should have been let go, the lawsuit alleges.

The chief district judge in Mecklenburg warned state court officials about the issue eight days after eCourts launched there, according to previously filed court documents.

The amended lawsuit adds Mecklenburg County Sheriff Gary McFadden and Clerk of Court Elisa Chinn-Gary as defendants. Chinn-Gary was one of five court clerks who spoke candidly about problems with the rollout of the new system during a March 1 meeting of the North Carolina Courts Commission.

The 28-member commission is appointed by the governor, state Supreme Court chief justice and leaders of the state House and Senate, and gathers at least once a year to discuss issues in the court system and make recommendations to lawmakers.

Several themes ran throughout the two-plus-hour March meeting: The clerk’s offices that have fully transitioned to the eCourts system have racked up hundreds of hours of overtime, found the process and new way of doing things more cumbersome, failed to get timely tech support when things go awry, and  lost workers to early retirement and other jobs because of the workload.

Amy Auth, AOC legislative director, and Carr McLamb, AOC legislative counsel, acknowledged that there had been bumps with the rollout in their presentation.

“It’s a work in progress, I’m pretty confident to say it’s not more efficient today than it was before eCourts, but I am confident to say that we will get more efficient,” McLamb said t. “This is a long-term process.”

People involved in civil, rather than criminal, cases have spoken more highly of the system. But routine traffic cases and other criminal matters that used to be resolved quickly are now more challenging, both clerks and lawmakers said.

The state Division of Motor Vehicles asked for a system pause in October, seeking resolve of such hiccups. Guilford County made a similar request in late January.

“Change is hard,” McLamb said. “Nobody likes change. We are not opposed to a pause if we deem it necessary. …It’s not going to be perfect results–there are hiccups, there are issues–but when you put them in context of what we’re delivering to the public, it’s a balance.”

—Anne Blythe and Michael Hewlett

---

Parole Review Challenged

New federal court filings allege that North Carolina’s parole commission has a flawed review process that has violated the rights of an Iredell County man convicted of second-degree murder as a teenager. 

Brett Abrams, now 55, was just 14 when Iredell prosecutors said he stabbed a neighbor to death on July 11, 1983. The next year, Abrams pleaded guilty to second-degree murder and was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole. In 1993, he became eligible for parole, but all of his requests have been denied. 

The Southern Coalition for Social Justice filed a motion for summary judgment in the Eastern District of North Carolina, alleging that, among other things, the N.C. Post-Release and Parole Commission failed to follow its own process in reviewing Abrams’ applications. According to the lawsuit, Abrams has been on work release and held in minimum custody for the last 15 years, and has not had any infractions in 17 years–evidence of a clean record. The victim’s family opposes his release, saying he has never expressed remorse.

The commission’s process “is rife with standardless and unconstitutional discretion; lacks adequate safeguards against serious risks of error; and permits material misrepresentations and omissions,” wrote Jake Sussman, a coalition attorney, said in a memorandum. 

Sussman said in court filings that the commission was supposed to do better after a 2015 ruling from a federal judge that found its review process violated the rights of juvenile offenders. 

By 2018, the commission had made changes to the review process, but Sussman argues that the problems persisted. For example, Abrams had lost his brother a year before the alleged murder in what authorities determined was an accident but a part-time parole analyst said in her reports that Abrams was criminally responsible for his brother’s death. 

The analyst also omitted records from the state psychologist who evaluated Abrams – records that would have given the commission relevant information on whether Abrams was being rehabilitated, Sussman said. Abrams was also denied an opportunity to participate in an internal program meant to help incarcerated people along the pathway to getting parole, Sussman said. 

A hearing on the motion has not yet been set. 

—Michael Hewlett

---

Did someone forward this to you? Subscribe here to get our weekly courts newsletter.

---

---

Back in the News

Greg Lindberg, the former North Carolina insurance executive charged with attempting to bribe state officials, took a loss in court earlier this month in his effort to delay liquidation of his firms’ assets.

The Court of Appeals ruled unanimously that it could go forward, Insurance Journal reports. State Insurance Commissioner Mike Causey had moved to liquidate two of Lindberg’s companies in order to pay back policyholders. 

“Today’s well-reasoned decision by the North Carolina Court of Appeals is another critical step in support of my goal of getting policyholders repaid,” Causey said in a statement last week. “As it stands today, the liquidation order will become effective June 30, 2024. On that date, the various state guaranty associations will begin the process of paying policyholder claims.”

Shaun Assael wrote about Lindberg’s legal troubles, as well as his more quixotic pursuits, last year. The Durham native spent 633 days behind bars before getting his bribery conviction overturned. 

The retrial in that case is set for May 6. 

—Kate Sheppard

---

Have any suggestions for improving this newsletter or stories we should look into? Email us at courts@theassemblync.com.

---

---

---