(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "North Carolina courts : annual report of the Administrative Office of the Courts"



■ . 

JUM S3 m 



ffiovtl] (Earoltna (Exmrte 






ISSS-8S 




JVnnual ^Report 

of tfye 

JVommtstrattOe ©fftce of tije Courts 



The Cover: The Wilkes County Courthouse in Wilkesboro, North Carolina was completed in 
1 903. It is one of few surviving Beaux-Arts Neo-Classical Revival courthouses designed at the 
turn of the century by Charlotte, North Carolina architects. The three-story central core is 
fronted by a columned Ionic portico, crowned with a narrow oblong dome. Details include 
foliate scrolls in the portico's tympanum, bullseye windows in the base of the dome, segmental 
arched windows, and handsome wooden staircases rising at either side of the front entrance. 
Wilkes County was formed in 1 777 with Wilkesboro (originally called Mulberry Field) as the 
seat. 



NORTH CAROLINA COURTS 



1988-89 




ANNUAL REPORT 



of the 



ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS 




ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS 

JUSTICE BUILDING 
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 



The Honorable James G. Exum, Jr., Chief Justice 
The Supreme Court of North Carolina 
Raleigh, North Carolina 

Dear Mr. Chief Justice: 

In accord with Section 7A-343 of the North Carolina General Statutes, I herewith transmit the Twenty-third 
Annual Report of the Administrative Office of the Courts, relating to the fiscal year, July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989. 

Fiscal year 1988-89 marks the fifth consecutive year with significant increases in filings and dispositions in both the 
Superior and District Courts. During 1988-89, as compared to 1987-88, total case filings increased by 11.8% in 
Superior Court and by 9.9% in District Court; dispositions increased by 10.4% in Superior Court and by 10.3% in 
District Court. Because total filings were greater than total dispositions, more cases were pending at the end of the 
fiscal year than were pending at the beginning. 

Appreciation is expressed to the many persons who participated in the data reporting, compilation, and writing 
required to produce this Annual Report. Within the Administrative Office of the Courts, principal responsibilities 
were shared by the Research and Planning Division and the Information Services Division. The principal burden of 
reporting the great mass of trial court data rested upon the offices of the clerks of superior court located in each of the 
one hundred counties of the State. The Clerk of the Supreme Court and the Clerk of the Court of Appeals provided 
the case data relating to our appellate courts. 

Without the responsible work of many persons across the State this report would not have been possible. 

Respectfully submitted, 



Franklin Freeman, Jr. 
Director 



July 1990 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2012 with funding from 

LYRASIS Members and Sloan Foundation 



http://archive.org/details/sevenwisemenofco1989gumm 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



Parti 
The 1988-89 Judicial Year in Review 

The 1988-89 Judicial Year in Review 1 

Part II 

Court System Organization and Operations in 1988-89 

Historical Development of the North Carolina Court System 7 

The Present Court System 9 

Organization and Operations 

The Supreme Court 13 

The Court of Appeals 24 

Map of Judicial Divisions and Superior Court Districts 28 

Map of District Court Districts 29 

Map of Prosecutorial Districts 30 

The Superior Courts 31 

The District Courts 34 

District Attorneys 40 

Clerks of Superior Court 43 

Juvenile Services Division 46 

Office of Guardian Ad Litem Services 48 

Public Defenders 50 

Appellate Defender 52 

The North Carolina Courts Commission 53 

The Judicial Standards Commission 55 

Part III 
Court Resources in 1988-89 

Judicial Department Finances 

Appropriations 59 

Expenditures 62 

Receipts 64 

Distribution of Receipts 65 

Cost and Case Data on Representation of Indigents 68 

Judicial Department Personnel 76 

Part IV 

Trial Courts Caseflow Data in 1988-89 

Trial Courts Case Data 79 

Superior Court Division Caseflow Data 83 

District Court Division Caseflow Data 175 



Tables, Charts and Graphs 

Part II 
Court System Organization and Operations in 1988-89 

Original Jurisdictions and Routes of Appeal in the 

Present Court System 9 

Principal Administrative Authorities for North Carolina 

Trial Courts 12 

The Supreme Court of North Carolina 13 

Supreme Court. Caseload Inventory 15 

Supreme Court. Appeals Filed 16 

Supreme Court. Petitions Filed 16 

Supreme Court, Caseload Types 17 

Supreme Court. Submission of Cases Reaching Decision Stage 18 

Supreme Court, Disposition of Petitions and Other Proceedings 18 

Supreme Court. Disposition of Appeals 19 

Supreme Court, Manner of Disposition of Appeals 20 

Supreme Court, Type of Disposition of Petitions 20 

Supreme Court. Appeals Docketed and Disposed of, 

1983-84—1988-89 21 

Supreme Court, Petitions Docketed and Allowed, 

1983-84—1988-89 22 

Supreme Court, Processing Time for Disposed Cases 23 

The Court of Appeals of North Carolina 24 

Court of Appeals, Filings and Dispositions 26 

Court of Appeals, Manner of Case Dispositions 26 

Court of Appeals, Filings and Dispositions, 1983-84—1988-89 27 

Map of Judicial Divisions and Superior Court Districts 28 

Map of District Court Districts 29 

Map of Prosecutorial Districts 30 

Judges of Superior Court 31 

Special Judges and Emergency Judges of Superior Court 32 

District Court Judges 34 

District Attorneys 39 

Clerks of Superior Court 43 

Chief Court Counselors — Juvenile Services Division 47 

Guardian Ad Litem Division Coordinators 49 

Public Defenders 50 

Appellate Defenders 52 

The North Carolina Courts Commission 53 

The Judicial Standards Commission 55 

Part III 
Court Resources in 1988-89 

General Fund Appropriations, All State Agencies 

and Judicial Department 59 

General Fund Appropriations, All State Agencies 

and Judicial Department 60 



Tables, Charts and Graphs 

General Fund Appropriations for Operating Expenses of All 

State Agencies and Judicial Department, 1982-83—1988-89 61 

General Fund Expenditures for Judicial Department Operations 62 

Judicial Department Expenditures 63 

Judicial Department Receipts 64 

Distribution of Judicial Department Receipts 65 

Amounts of Fees, Fines, and Forfeitures Collected by the 

Courts and Distributed to Counties and Municipalities 66 

Cost and Case Data on Representation of Indigents 69 

State Mental Health Hospital Commitment Hearings 70 

Assigned Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem Cases and Expenditures 71 

Judicial Department Personnel 76 

Part IV 

Trial Courts Caseflow Data in 1988-89 

Superior Courts, Caseload Trends 84 

Superior Courts, Caseload 85 

Superior Courts, Median Ages of Cases 86 

Superior Courts, Civil Caseload Trends 87 

Superior Courts, Civil Case Filings By Case-Type 88 

Superior Courts, Civil Caseload Inventory 89 

Superior Courts, Civil Cases, Manner of Disposition 94 

Superior Courts, Civil Cases, Manner of Disposition, By County 95 

Superior Courts, Ages of Civil Cases Pending 102 

Superior Courts, Ages of Civil Cases Disposed 107 

Superior Courts, Caseload Trends in Estates and Special Proceedings 112 

Superior Courts, Filings and Dispositions For Estates and Special Proceedings 113 

Superior Courts, Caseload Trends of Criminal Cases 118 

Superior Courts, Criminal Case Filings By Case-Type 119 

Superior Courts, Caseload Inventory for Criminal Cases 1 20 

Superior Courts, Manner of Disposition of Felonies 126 

Superior Courts, Manner of Disposition of Felonies, By District and County 127 

Superior Courts, Manner of Disposition of Misdemeanors 135 

Superior Courts, Manner of Disposition of Misdemeanors, By District and County 136 

Superior Courts, Ages of Criminal Cases Pending, By District and County 144 

Superior Courts, Ages of Criminal Cases Disposed, By District and County 158 

District Courts, Filings and Dispositions 1 76 

District Courts, Caseload Trends 177 

District Courts, Filing and Disposition Trends of Civil Cases 178 

District Courts, Civil Non-Magistrate Cases 179 

District Courts, Civil Non-Magistrate Filings By Case-Type 1 80 

District Courts, Civil Caseload Inventory 181 

District Courts, Manner of Disposition of Civil Cases 186 

District Courts, Manner of Disposition of Civil Cases, By District and County 1 87 

District Courts, Ages of Domestic Relations Cases Pending, By District and County 197 

District Courts, Ages of Domestic Relations Cases Disposed, By District and County 202 

District Courts, Ages of General Civil and Magistrate Appeal/Transfer Cases Pending, 

By District and County 207 



in 



Tables, Charts and Graphs 

District Courts. Ages of General Civil and Magistrate Appeal/Transfer Cases Disposed, 

By District and County 212 

District Courts. Civil Magistrate Filings and Dispositions, By District and County 217 

District Courts. Matters Alleged in Juvenile Petitions, By District and County 220 

District Courts. Adjudicatory Hearings For Juvenile Matters, By District and County 225 

District Courts, Filing and Disposition Trends of Infractions and Criminal Cases 232 

District Courts. Motor Vehicle Criminal Case Filings and Dispositions, By District and County 233 

District Courts. Non-Motor Vehicle Criminal Cases, Caseload Inventory, By District and County 238 

District Courts. Non-Motor Vehicle Criminal Cases, Manner of Disposition 243 

District Courts. Non-Motor Vehicle Criminal Cases, Manner of Disposition, By District and County 244 

District Courts. Ages of Non-Motor Vehicle Criminal Cases Pending, By District and County 250 

District Courts, Ages of Non-Motor Vehicle Criminal Cases Disposed, By District and County 256 

District Courts. Infraction Case Filings and Dispositions, By District and County 262 



IV 



PARTI 



THE 1988-1989 JUDICIAL YEAR IN REVIEW 



THE 1988-89 JUDICIAL YEAR IN REVIEW 



This Annual Report on the work of North Carolina's 
Judicial Department is for the fiscal year which began July 1, 
1988 and ended June 30, 1989. 



districts, provides for a new district court judge for new District 
Court District 6B, and a district attorney for new Prosecutorial 
District 6A. 



The Workload of the Courts 

Case filings in the Supreme Court during 1988-89 totaled 
177, compared with 145 filings during 1987-88. A total of 447 
petitions were filed in the Supreme Court, compared with 635 
in 1987-88; and 71 petitions were allowed, compared with 67 
in 1987-88. 

For the Court of Appeals for 1988-89, case filings were 
1,418 compared with 1,351 for the 1987-88 year. Petitions 
filed in 1988-89 totaled 385, compared with 446 during the 
1987-88 year. 

More detailed data on the appellate courts is included in Part 
II of this Annual Report. 

In the superior courts, case filings (civil and criminal) 
increased by 1 1 .8% to a total of 1 1 8, 1 88 in 1 988-89, compared 
with 1 05,704 in 1 987-88. Superior court case dispositions also 
increased, to a total of 111,278, compared with 100,808 in 
1987-88. As case filings during the year exceeded case 
dispositions, the total number of cases pending at the end of the 
year increased by 6,910. 

Not including juvenile proceedings and mental hospital 
commitment hearings, the statewide total of district court 
filings (civil and criminal) during 1988-89 was 2,203,743, an 
increase of 199,296 (9.9%) from 1987-88 filings of 2,004,447 
cases. During 1988-89, a total of 678,189 infraction cases were 
filed along with a total of 467,644 criminal motor vehicle cases, 
for a combined total of 1 , 1 45,833 cases. This combined total is 
an increase of 1 1 7,58 1 cases (11 .4%) above the 1 ,028,252 cases 
filed during 1987-88. During 1988-89, filings of criminal non- 
motor vehicle cases in the district courts increased by 42,180 
(8.2%) to 556,890, compared with 514,710 during 1987-88. 
Filings of civil magistrate cases in the district courts increased 
by 30,693 (11.1%), to 308,029 during 1 988-89 compared with 
277,336 during 1987-88. 

Operations of the superior and district courts are summarized 
in Part II of this Report, and detailed information on the 
caseloads is presented in Part IV for the 100 counties, and for 
the judicial and prosecutorial districts. 

1989 Legislative Highlights 
Redistricting 

District Court District 6 (effective December 1, 1989) and 
Prosecutorial District 6 (effective September 1, 1989) are 
divided into District Court and Prosecutorial Districts 6A 
(Halifax County) and 6B (Northampton, Bertie, and Hertford 
Counties) (Chapter 795, Sections 23 and 24). As a result, 
Superior Court, District Court, and Prosecutorial Districts 6A 
and 6B will be coterminous. 

Effective September 1, 1989, District Court District 19A is 
divided into District Court Districts 19A (Cabarrus County) 
and 19C (Rowan County) (Chapter 795, Section 23). As a 
result, Superior Court and District Court Districts 19A and 
19C will be coterminous. 

Chapter 795 allocates existing personnel among these 



Additional Seat of District Court 

Effective September 1 , 1 989, an additional seat of district 
court is authorized for District Court District 11, in Clayton 
(Johnston County) (Chapter 795, Section 23). 

Court Costs and Fees 

Effective August 15, 1989, court fees to be collected for 
support of the General Court of Justice are increased by $ 1 in 
civil and criminal cases in superior and district court (Chapter 
786, amending G.S. 7A-304(a) and 7A-305(a)). In superior 
court, total costs (including facilities and other fees) are 
increased to $60 in civil cases and $75 in criminal cases. In 
district court, the increases are to $45 in civil cases, $50 in 
criminal cases and infractions, and $29 in small claims cases 
assigned to a magistrate. 

Chapter 664, effective October 1, 1989, establishes a new fee 
of $15 under G.S. 7A-304(a), to be paid by convicted 
defendants who were released to the supervision of an agency 
providing pretrial release services. The fee is remitted to the 
county which provided the services. 

Chapter 719, effective October 1, 1989, amends the statute 
governing collection of costs in estates, G.S. 7A-307, to specify 
that no costs shall be assessed in certain small estate cases. 

Jurisdictional Amount in Small Claims Cases 

Effective October 1, 1989, the jurisdictional amount of civil 
small claims cases is increased from $1,500 to $2,000 (Chapter 
311). 

Magistrate Jurisdiction in Littering, Infraction, 
and Estate Cases 

Effective October 1, 1989, the jurisdiction of magistrates 
was expanded in three areas. The cases in which a magistrate 
may accept a guilty plea and enter judgment under G.S. 7A- 
273 were expanded to include littering offenses as directed by 
the chief district court judge (Chapter 343). Amendments to 
G.S. 7A-273(1) will allow magistrates to accept admission of 
responsibility and enter judgment in infractions cases in which 
the maximum penalty is $50 or less (Chapter 763); this statute 
presently covers misdemeanors in which the fine cannot exceed 
$50, and the amendment conforms to the 1986 decriminaliza- 
tion of minor traffic misdemeanors to "infractions." Finally, in 
certain estate cases under G.S. Chapter 30, magistrates may 
perform responsibilities related to the valuation of property 
assigned to a surviving spouse; previously, such duties were 
performed by two persons qualified to act as jurors (Chapter 
11). 

Authorities of Clerks, Assistants, and Deputies 

The General Assembly amended G.S. 7 A- 102(b), effective 
June 26, 1989, to promote efficiency when a superior or district 



THE 1988-89 JUDICIAL YEAR IN REVIEW 



court case is transferred from one county to another. In such 
cases, with consent of the clerks in both counties and the 
presiding judge, an assistant or deputy clerk from the original 
county may perform all the functions of the office of the Clerk 
in the county to which the case was transferred (Chapter 445). 
Chapter 493. effective June 28, 1989, makes two changes 
relating to when a clerk may decide not to hear a case. First, the 
reasons for disqualification under G.S. 7A-104 were expanded 
to specify that a clerk may disqualify him or herself in 
circumstances that justify disqualification or recusal by a 
judge. Second, in disputes between the County Board of 
Commissioners and the Board of Education, that are referred to 
a clerk under G.S. 115C-431(b), the clerk must transfer the 
matter to superior court if the clerk determines that the dispute 
cannot be arbitrated. 

Mandatory Civil Arbitration 

Following favorable experience in a pilot project for court- 
ordered nonbinding arbitration in civil cases, the General 
Assembly authorized the Supreme Court to adopt permanent 
rules governing such procedures statewide (Chapter 301, 
adding new G.S. 7A-37.1, effective July 1, 1989). Applicable 
to claims of $15,000 or less, the procedures must preserve a 
party's rights to trial de novo and jury trial. Subject to available 
funding. AOC is directed to implement (or terminate) arbitra- 
tion in such areas where the AOC Director and the senior 
resident superior court judge or chief district court judge 
conclude that the legislative objectives are (or are not) being 
accomplished. The objectives include greater efficiency, 
economy, and satisfaction. 

Child Custody and Visitation Mediation 

Favorable experience in a pilot project involving Districts 26 
and 27 A (Mecklenburg and Gaston Counties) led to enactment 
of new Article 39A in G.S. Chapter 7A, directing AOC to 
phase in programs statewide for mandatory mediation in cases 
involving child custody or visitation disputes (Chapter 795, 
Sec. 15). Under the procedures, unless the court grants a waiver 
based on statutory criteria, custody and visitation disputes must 
be referred to a mediator. Mediators must have the educational, 
training, and other qualifications specified by statute or AOC. 
The mediation, which is confidential, is intended to facilitate a 
cooperative, nonadversary resolution in the child's best interests. 
Any agreement reached is submitted to the court and, unless the 
court finds good reason not to, becomes a part of the court's 
order in the case. Funding was provided to continue the 
programs in the two pilot districts, and to establish one 
additional program in each fiscal year of the 1 989-9 1 biennium. 

Child Support Enforcement 

The General Assembly made several changes to strengthen 
and streamline the laws governing determination and enforce- 
ment of child support. 

Under Chapter 529, effective October 1, 1989 and until July 
1 . 1 990, the "advisory" guidelines previously promulgated by 
the Conference of Chief District Court Judges under G.S. 
50-1 3.4 will become "presumptive" guidelines, meaning that in 



the absence of special circumstances the amount of child 
support to be awarded by the court must be the amount set by 
the guidelines. The Conference of Chief District Court Judges 
is directed to prescribe uniform statewide presumptive guide- 
lines to be effective July 1, 1990, and to prescribe criteria for 
judges to apply when determining whether circumstances in a 
particular case justify deviation from the guidelines. The 
legislation includes requirements for public dissemination of 
proposed guidelines prior to their effectiveness. 

Chapter 601, effective October 1, 1989, amends G.S. 11- 
1 36.3 et. seq to provide that in IV-D child support cases income 
withholding is to be ordered immediately upon entry or 
modification of a child support order, or at request of the 
person to whom support is to be paid. The availability of 
income withholding in non-IV-D cases was also expanded, and 
is now available if the obligor has been delinquent or erratic in 
making payments (previously the obligor had to be at least one 
month in arrearage). 

Additional amendments affecting child support include 
Chapter 479 (amending G.S. 50- 13.9(d), effective January 1, 
1990), which makes sending a notice of delinquency prior to 
issuing an enforcement order in non-IV-D cases subject to the 
clerk's discretion if a notice of delinquency was sent during the 
prior 12 months; Chapter 490 (amending G.S. 110-130.1, 
effective June 28, 1989), which establishes a uniform $10 
application fee for the services of the Department of Human 
Resources, and repeals certain provisions for recovering costs 
from low-income applicants; and Chapter 665 (effective 
October 1 , 1 989), which makes state retirement subject to child 
support withholding. 

Self-Representation in Domestic Violence Cases 

The General Assembly enacted specific statutory authority 
for a domestic violence victim to proceed with a civil action 
without assistance of counsel (Chapter 461, effective January 
1, 1990). The Clerk must provide all necessary forms (to be 
developed by AOC), set hearing dates, and effect service of the 
summons, complaint, and other papers through appropriate 
law enforcement agencies upon payment of the service fee. 

Juvenile Code Revisions 

The 1989 Session made amendments to the Juvenile Code 
relating to a juvenile's privacy interests, custody, and placement. 

New subsection G.S. 7A-676(h) (added by Chapter 186, 
effective July 1, 1989) provides procedures for expunction of 
court and law enforcement records, on petition of a juvenile 
before or after reaching age 16, when a petition that alleged 
delinquent or undisciplined behavior was dismissed. 

The General Assembly expanded the court's authority to 
order a juvenile's parents to participate in medical, psycho- 
logical, or other treatment (Chapter 218, effective October 1, 
1989). Under new subsection G.S. 7A-650(b2), if required for 
the juvenile's best interests, the court may order a parent to 
undergo such treatment as a condition to returning legal or 
physical custody to the parent. If the parent is unable to pay the 
costs of treatment, the court may charge the costs to the county. 

Chapter 235 (effective October 1, 1989) amends the 
prerelease planning process that is required when a juvenile 



THE 1988-89 JUDICIAL YEAR IN REVIEW 



who was committed to the Division of Youth Services is ready 
for release. The amendments require consideration of a 
transitional placement in any program of the Division of Youth 
Services or AOC. 

Chapter 124 (effective October 1, 1989) amends G.S. 7A- 
575 to grant the court authority to detain a juvenile in secure 
custody when an SBI computer check reveals that there is a 
secure custody order for the juvenile on file in another county. 

Indigent Access to Civil Justice 

The General Assembly appropriated $1,000,000 for each 
year of the 1989-91 biennium to help pay for legal represen- 
tation of indigent persons in civil cases (Chapter 795, Sec. 25, 
effective August 12, 1989). The funds were appropriated to the 
North Carolina State Bar, for distribution to geographically 
based programs of the nonprofit Legal Services of North 
Carolina Corporation (LSNC). (The LSNC is also funded by 
the N.C. State Bar Interest on Lawyers' Trust Account 
program, and by federal funds under the U.S. Legal Services 
Corporation Act.) New section G.S. 7A-474.3 specifies types 
of civil cases for which state appropriation may be used 
(including cases involving family violence, spouse abuse, social 
security and other benefits, foreclosure actions against farmers, 
and child support), and cases for which state appropriation may 
not be used (including criminal cases, cases involving abortions, 
claims of agriculture employees regarding terms of employ- 
ment, and claims of prisoners regarding a term of incarceration). 

Indigent Persons' Attorney Fee Fund 

For the 1989-91 biennium, the General Assembly continued 
the allotment system, first enacted for 1988-89, under which 
funds for the fees of attorneys assigned to represent indigents 
are allotted to each district or county in proportion to each 
district's or county's assigned counsel caseload during the prior 
year (Chapter 500, Section 68). 

Speedy Trial Act Repealed 

Effective October 1, 1989, Chapter 688 repeals the Speedy 
Trial Act. Under the Act, a criminal defendant in superior court 
could obtain dismissal of the charges if the case did not come to 
trial within 1 20 days, unless the delay was excusable for reasons 
specified in the Act. (A criminal defendant has a Constitutional 
right to a "speedy trial" under both the North Carolina 
Constitution, Article I, Sections 18 and 21, and the Sixth 
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.) 

Chapter 688 also enacts criteria which, at a minimum, the 
judge must consider under G.S. 15A-952 when determining 
whether to grant a continuance. The factors include the nature 
and complexity of the case, and whether the case involves 
physical or sexual abuse of a victim under age 16 whose 
well-being would be adversely affected by delay. 

Rights of Victims and Witnesses 

The General Assembly extended application of the Fair 
Treatment for Victims and Witnesses Act (Chapter 596, 
effective October 1, 1989, amending G.S. 15A-824 and -825). 



In addition to cases involving felonies, the Act will cover cases 
involving serious misdemeanors as determined in the sole 
discretion of the district attorney. Additional information to be 
given each victim and witness includes information about plea 
bargaining procedures; notice of the right to be present at the 
entire trial, unless sequestered by the judge; and the right to ask 
the district attorney to prevent disclosure of the victim's or 
witness' home address. Provisions requiring notice in certain 
cases of an offender's escape or scheduled release from custody 
are made subject to written request of the victim. 

Chapter 679 (effective July 26, 1989) and Chapter 322 
(effective June 15, 1989) amend the Crime Victim's Compen- 
sation Act, G.S. Chapter 1 5B. The amendments limit compen- 
sation to victims, dependents, and third persons who provided 
voluntary assistance to a victim; expand the investigative 
powers of the Crime Victim's Compensation Commission; 
make compensation available to victims of an impaired driving 
offense; extend the right to claim compensation to North 
Carolina residents injured in a state that does not have a victim 
compensation program; and limit recovery to economic loss. 

Pretrial Release 

The General Assembly amended G.S. 7A-534(a) to allow a 
judicial official to impose conditions of pretrial release (such as 
restrictions on travel or conduct) on offenders who are released 
on secured bond (Chapter 259, effective October 1, 1989). 
Under present law, such authority extends only to forms of 
pretrial release other than secured bond. 

Substance Abuse Assessment of DWI Offenders 

Effective January 1, 1990, the substance abuse assessment 
required under G.S. 20-179(m) for certain offenders convicted 
of impaired driving will be required as a condition of probation 
for all offenders who are placed on probation (Chapter 691). 
This change has been in effect as a pilot project in ten counties 
since 1988. Present law in nonpilot counties requires such 
assessment only for second offenders and offenders who 
refused to take a blood alcohol test or who tested . 1 5 or more. 
Effective January 1, 1990, in all counties, new subsection G.S. 
20-179(t) will require, in addition, substance abuse assessment 
for all offenders who did not receive probation, as a condition 
to having a revoked driver's license reissued. Additional 
amendments include provisions for requiring the defendant to 
pay the fees of the assessment or treatment before a driver's 
license may be reissued (effective July 28, 1989, in pilot 
counties, and July 1, 1990, statewide); and procedures by 
which the defendant may obtain court review of an assessment 
facility's refusal to certify completion of the assessment 
program (effective July 28, 1989, statewide). 

HIV (AIDS) Testing 

Chapter 499 amends G.S. 15A-534.3, effective October 1, 
1989, requiring a test for the HIV and Hepatitis B viruses to be 
ordered for a criminal defendant at the time of first appearance 
if required by county health officials and if there is probable 
cause to believe that the defendant exposed someone to those 
viruses. 



THE 1988-89 JUDICIAL YEAR IN REVIEW 



New and Expanded Drug Offenses 

Chapters 672 and 690. amending G.S. 90-95(h) effective 
October 1. 1989. create the felony offenses, respectively, of 
trafficking in amphetamines and trafficking in methampheta- 
mines. Punishments range from prison sentences of at least 
seven years to at least 35 years and minimum fines ranging 
from S25.000 to S250.000. depending upon the quantity of 
drugs involved. 

Chapter 694 amends G.S. 14-17, effective October 1, 1989, 
making distribution of cocaine which results in death, second 
degree murder. Chapter 641 amends G.S. 90-95(d), effective 
October 1. 1989. making possession of any amount of cocaine 
a felony. 

Prison Population Stabilization 

Chapter 1 of the 1989 Session Laws increased the maximum 
number of prisoners that can be housed in the state prison 
system before the Parole Commission must reduce the prison 
population by granting parole to otherwise eligible offenders. 
The prison cap in G.S. 148-4.1 was raised, effective February 1, 
1989. from 17,460 to 17,640. The amount of time the Parole 
Commission is given to reduce the prison population is raised 
from 60 days to 90 days. This legislation prohibits the granting 
of parole, merely to meet the prison cap, to certain sex and drug 
offenders, and expands the eligibility of certain other offenders 
for community service parole under G.S. 15A- 137 1(h) and 
15A-1380.2(h). 

Emergency Judges 

The number of years of creditable service that a retired judge 
must have under G.S. 7A-52(a), in order to qualify to hold 
court as an emergency judge, was reduced from eight to five 
years (Chapter 116, effective May 22, 1989). 

Salaries 

Funds were appropriated by the 1989 Session for a six 
percent pay raise for all officials and employees of the Judicial 
Department for each year of the 1989-91 biennium. 

Amendments to G.S. 7A-171.1(a), effective July 1, 1989, 
make the salary credits for magistrates who have advanced 
degrees or specified prior relevant experience applicable to all 
magistrates. Under prior law, the credits applied only to 
beginning, full-time magistrates. 

The table in G.S. 7A-101(a) that governs the salaries of 
clerks of superior court, according to county population, was 
amended (Chapter 799, Section 27). As a result of deleting the 
lowest population category, effective July 1, 1989, clerks in 
counties with a population of less than 30,000 will be paid at 
the next higher pay scale. 

New Positions 

The 1989 Session of the General Assembly appropriated or 
authorized the use of funds for the following new positions 



during fiscal 1989-90: two district court judgeships, one for 
District 16A effective July 1, 1989, and the other for new 
District 6B, to be appointed by the Governor effective 
December 1, 1989, with election to a four-year term in 1990; 
two court reporters for superior court and four court reporters 
for district court; two secretaries for superior court judges; ten 
secretaries for chief district court judges who at present do not 
have secretaries; ten magistrates to be allocated in accordance 
with G.S. 7A-171; 19 assistant district attorneys, assigned to 
Districts 3B, 4, 5, 7, 10, 1 1, 15 A, 15B, two in 16A, 18, 20, 21, 
22, 23, 25, 26, 27 A, and 28; 14 secretaries for district attorney 
offices; 10 victim/witness assistant positions; 36 deputy clerks, 
plus up to $670,000 of funds appropriated as salaries for 
temporary deputy clerks to establish full- or part-time perma- 
nent positions; authority to use up to $218,055 from the 
indigent persons attorney fee fund for five new assistant public 
defenders; two secretaries for public defender offices; an 
assistant to special counsel in the 10th District; 22 juvenile 
court counselor positions and six secretaries; and upgrade or 
establishment of 32 guardian ad litem positions. 

For the 1990-91 fiscal year, subject to change in the 1990 
Session, the 1989 Session appropriated or authorized the use of 
funds for the following additional positions: six new resident 
superior court judgeships, and two special judgeships converted 
to regular judgeships, allocated to Districts 3 A, 5, 1 1 , 1 3, 1 7 A, 
20A, 25 A, and 29, to be elected in the 1990 elections, with 
terms commencing January 1, 1991, and terms ending 
concurrently with the terms of other superior court judge(s) in 
these respective districts; 15 district court judgeships, one 
effective July 1, 1990, for District 9, to be appointed by the 
Governor and with election for a four-year term in 1992, and 
the other 14 district court judgeships effective December 3, 
1990, to be filled in the 1990 elections, for Districts 4, 5, 7, 10, 
1 1 , 1 2, 1 7B, 1 8, 20, 22, 25, 26, 27B, and 28; six court reporters 
for superior court; two secretaries for superior court judges; five 
magistrates, to be allocated in accordance with G.S. 7A-171; 
one case management assistant each for trial court admini- 
strators in the 10th and 26th districts; eight assistant district 
attorneys, for Districts 1, 8, 9, 13, 14, 17B, 27B, and 30; five 
secretaries for district attorney offices; two victim and witness 
assistant positions; 18 deputy clerks, plus authorization to use 
up to $670,000 of funds appropriated as salaries for temporary 
deputy clerks to establish full- or part-time permanent positions; 
authorization to use up to $261,615 from the indigent persons 
attorney fee fund for five new assistant public defenders; one 
secretary and one paralegal for public defender offices; seven 
juvenile court counselor positions; and four new guardian ad 
litem staff positions. 



Total Appropriation 

The 1 989 Session of the General Assembly appropriated a 
total of $200,599,095 to the Judicial Department for the 
1989-90 fiscal year. For the 1990-91 fiscal year, subject to 
revision by the 1990 Session, the total appropriated for the 
Judicial Department is $204,475,395. 



PART II 



COURT SYSTEM ORGANIZATION 
AND OPERATIONS 

• Historical Development of Court System 

• Present Court System 

• Organization and Operations in 1988-89 



HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTH CAROLINA COURT SYSTEM 



From its early colonial period North Carolina's judicial 
system has been the focus of periodic attention and adjustment. 
Through the years, there has been a repeated sequence of 
critical examination, proposals for reform, and finally the 
enactment of some reform measures. 

Colonial Period 

Around 1 700 the royal governor established a General (or 
Supreme) Court for the colony and a dispute developed over 
the appointment of associate justices. The Assembly conceded 
to the King the right to name the chief justice but unsuccessfully 
tried to win for itself the power to appoint the associate justices. 
Other controversies developed concerning the creation and 
jurisdiction of the courts and the tenure of judges. As for the 
latter, the Assembly's position was that judge appointments 
should be for good behavior as against the royal governor's 
decision for life appointment. State historians have noted that 
"the Assembly won its fight to establish courts and the judicial 
structure in the province was grounded on laws enacted by the 
legislature," which was more familiar with local conditions and 
needs (Lefler and Newsome, 142). Nevertheless, North Carolina 
alternated between periods under legislatively enacted reforms 
(like good behavior tenure and the Court Bill of 1 746, which 
contained the seeds of the post-Revolutionary court system) 
and periods of stalemate and anarchy after such enactments 
were nullified by royal authority. A more elaborate system was 
framed by legislation in 1767 to last five years. It was not 
renewed because of persisting disagreement between local and 
royal partisans. As a result, North Carolina was without higher 
courts until after Independence (Battle, 847). 

At the lower court level during the colonial period, judicial 
and county government administrative functions were com- 
bined in the authority of the justices of the peace, who were 
appointed by the royal governor. 

After the Revolution 

When North Carolina became a state in 1776, the colonial 
structure of the court system was retained largely intact. The 
Courts of Pleas and Quarter Sessions — the county court 
which continued in use from about 1670 to 1868 — were still 
held by the assembled justices of the peace in each county. The 
justices were appointed by the governor on the recommenda- 
tion of the General Assembly, and they were paid out of fees 
charged litigants. On the lowest level of the judicial system, 
magistrate courts of limited jurisdiction were held by justices of 
the peace, singly or in pairs, while the county court was out of 
term. 

The new Constitution of 1776 empowered the General 
Assembly to appoint judges of the Supreme Court of Law and 
Equity. A court law enacted a year later authorized three 
superior court judges and created judicial districts. Sessions 
were supposed to be held in the court towns of each district 
twice a year, under a system much like the one that had expired 
in 1772. Just as there had been little distinction in terminology 
between General Court and Supreme Court prior to the 
Revolution, the terms Supreme Court and Superior Court were 



also interchangeable during the period immediately following 
the Revolution. 

One of the most vexing governmental problems confronting 
the new State of North Carolina was its judiciary. "From its 
inception in 1777 the state's judiciary caused complaint and 
demands for reform." (Lefler and Newsome, 291, 292). 
Infrequency of sessions, conflicting judge opinions, an insuf- 
ficient number of judges, and lack of means for appeal were all 
cited as problems, although the greatest weakness was con- 
sidered to be the lack of a real Supreme Court. 

In 1779, the legislature required the Superior Court judges to 
meet together in Raleigh as a Court of Conference to resolve 
cases which were disagreed on in the districts. This court was 
continued and made permanent by subsequent laws. The 
justices were required to put their opinions in writing to be 
delivered orally in court. The Court of Conference was 
changed in name to the Supreme Court in 1805 and authorized 
to hear appeals in 1810. Because of the influence of the English 
legal system, however, there was still no conception of an 
alternative to judges sitting together to hear appeals from cases 
which they had themselves heard in the districts in panels of as 
few as two judges (Battle, 848). In 1818, though, an inde- 
pendent three-judge Supreme Court was created for review of 
cases decided at the Superior Court level. 

Meanwhile, semi-annual superior court sessions in each 
county were made mandatory in 1806, and the State was 
divided into six circuits, or ridings, where the six judges were to 
sit in rotation, two judges constituting a quorum as before. 

The County Court of justices of the peace continued during 
this period as the lowest court and as the agency of local 
government. 

After the Civil War 

Major changes to modernize the judiciary and make it more 
democratic were made in 1868. A primary holdover from the 
English legal arrangement — the distinction between law and 
equity proceedings — was abolished. The County Court's 
control of local government was abolished. Capital offenses 
were limited to murder, arson, burglary and rape, and the 
Constitution stated that the aim of punishment was "not only to 
satisfy justice, but also to reform the offender, and thus prevent 
crime." The membership of the Supreme Court was raised to 
five, and the selection of the justices (including the designation 
of the chief justice) and superior court judges (raised in number 
to 12) was taken from the legislature and given to the voters, 
although vacancies were to be filled by the governor until the 
next election. The Court of Pleas and Quarter Sessions — The 
County Court of which three justices of the peace constituted a 
quorum — was eliminated. Its judicial responsibilities were 
divided between the Superior Courts and the individual justices 
of the peace, who were retained as separate judicial officers 
with limited jurisdiction. 

Conservatively oriented amendments to the 1868 Constitu- 
tion in 1875 reduced the number of Supreme Court justices to 
three and the Superior Court judges to nine. The General 
Assembly, instead of the governor, was given the power to 
appoint justices of the peace. Most of the modernizing changes 



Historical Development Of The North Carolina Court System, Continued 



in the post-Civil War Constitution, however, were left, and the 
i udicial structure it had established continued without systema- 
tic modification through more than half of the 20th century. (A 
further constitutional amendment approved by the voters in 
November. 1888. returned the Supreme Court membership to 
Eve, and the number of superior court judges to twelve.) 

Before Reorganization 

A multitude of legislative enactments to meet rising demands 
and to respond to changing needs had heavily encumbered the 
1868 judicial structure by the time systematic court reforms 
were proposed in the 1950's. This accrual of piecemeal change 
and addition to the court system was most evident at the lower, 
local court level, where hundreds of courts specially created by 
statute operated with widely dissimilar structure and jurisdiction. 

By 1965. when the implementation of the most recent major 
reforms was begun, the court system in North Carolina 
consisted of four levels: (a) the Supreme Court, with appellate 
jurisdiction; (b) the superior court, with general trial jurisdiction; 
(c) the local statutory courts of limited jurisdiction, and (d) 
justices of the peace and mayor's courts, with petty jurisdiction. 

At the superior court level, the State had been divided into 
30 judicial districts and 21 solicitorial districts. The 38 superior 
court judges (who rotated among the counties) and the district 
solicitors were paid by the State. The clerk of superior court, 
who was judge of probate and often also a juvenile judge, was a 
county official. There were specialized branches of superior 
court in some counties for matters like domestic relations and 
juvenile offenses. 

The lower two levels were local courts. At the higher of these 
local court levels were more than 180 recorder-type courts. 
Among these were the county recorder's courts, municipal 
recorder's courts and township recorder's courts; the general 
county courts, county criminal courts and special county 
courts: the domestic relations courts and the juvenile courts. 
Some of these had been established individually by special 
legislative acts more than a half-century earlier. Others had 
been created by general law across the State since 1919. About 
half were county courts and half were city or township courts. 
Jurisdiction included misdemeanors (mostly traffic offenses), 
preliminary hearings and sometimes civil matters. The judges, 
who were usually part-time, were variously elected or appointed 
locally. 

At the lowest level were about 90 mayor's court and some 
925 justices of the peace. These officers had similar criminal 
jurisdiction over minor cases with penalties up to a $50 fine or 
30 days in jail. The justices of the peace also had civil 
jurisdiction of minor cases. These court officials were compen- 
sated by the fees they exacted, and they provided their own 
facilities. 



Court Reorganization 

The need for a comprehensive evaluation and revision of the 
court system received the attention and support of Governor 
Luther H. Hodges in 1957, who encouraged the leadership of 



the North Carolina Bar Association to pursue the matter. A 
Court Study Committee was established as an agency of the 
North Carolina Bar Association, and that Committee issued its 
report, calling for reorganization, at the end of 1958. A 
legislative Constitutional Commission, which worked with the 
Court Study Committee, finished its report early the next year. 
Both groups called for the structuring of an all-inclusive court 
system which would be directly state-operated, uniform in its 
organization throughout the State and centralized in its 
administration. The plan was for a simplified, streamlined and 
unified structure. A particularly important part of the proposal 
was the elimination of the local statutory courts and their 
replacement by a single District Court; the office of justice of 
the peace was to be abolished, and the newly fashioned position 
of magistrate would function within the District Court as a 
subordinate judicial office. 

Constitutional amendments were introduced in the legisla- 
ture in 1959 but these failed to gain the required three-fifths 
vote of each house. The proposals were reintroduced and 
approved at the 1961 session. The Constitutional amendments 
were approved by popular vote in 1962, and three years later 
the General Assembly enacted statutes to put the system into 
effect by stages. By the end of 1 970 all of the counties and their 
courts had been incorporated into the new system, whose 
unitary nature was symbolized by the name, General Court of 
Justice. The designation of the entire 20th century judicial 
system as a single, statewide "court," with components for 
various types and levels of caseload, was adapted from North 
Carolina's earlier General Court, whose full venue extended to 
all of the 1 7th century counties. 

After Reorganization 

Notwithstanding the comprehensive reorganization adopted 
in 1962, the impetus for changes has continued. In 1965, the 
Constitution was amended to provide for the creation of an 
intermediate Court of Appeals. It was amended again in 1972 
to allow for the Supreme Court to censure or remove judges; 
implementing legislation provides for such action upon the 
recommendation of the Judicial Standards Commission. As for 
the selection of judges, persistent efforts were made in the 
1970's to obtain legislative approval of amendments to the 
State Constitution, to appoint judges according to "merit" 
instead of electing them by popular, partisan vote. The 
proposed amendments received the backing of a majority of the 
members of each house, but not the three-fifths required to 
submit constitutional amendments to a vote of the people. 
Merit selection continues to be a significant issue before the 
General Assembly. 

Major Sources 

Battle, Kemp P., An Address on the History of the Supreme Court (Delivered 

in 1888). 1 North Carolina Reports 835-876. 
Hinsdale, C. E., County Government in North Carolina 1965 Edition. 
Lefler, Hugh Talmage and Albert Ray Newsome, North Carolina- The History 

of a Southern Slate. 1963 Edition. 
Sanders, John L., Constitutional Revision and Court Reform: A Legislative 

History. 1959 Special Report of the N.C. Institute of Government. 
Stevenson, George and Ruby D. Arnold, North Carolina Courts of Law and 

Equity Prior to 1868. N.C. Archives Information Circular, 1973. 



THE PRESENT COURT SYSTEM 
Original Jurisdiction and Routes of Appeal 



Recommendations 

from Judicial 

Standards Commission 



Original Jurisdiction \ 
All felony cases; civil I 
cases in excess of ^ 
$10,000* 



SUPERIOR 
COURTS 

77 Judges 




Final Order of 

Utilities Commission in 

General Rate Cases 



1 



COURT OF 
APPEALS 

12 Judges 



K 



/ 



Decisions of 

Most Administrative 

Agencies 



Original Jurisdiction 
Probate and estates, 
special proceedings 
(condemnations, 
adoptions, partitions, 
foreclosures, etc.) 




criminal cases 
(for trial de novo) 



V| 



Decisions of Industrial 

Commission, State Bar, 

Property Tax Commission, 

Commissioner of Insurance, 

Bd. of State Contract Appeals, 

Dept. of Human Resources, 

Commissioner of Banks, 
Administrator of Savings and 

Loans, Governor's Waste 
Management Board, and the 
Utilities Commission (in cases 
other than general rate cases) 



civil cases 
I 



DISTRICT 
COURTS 

162 Judges 



Clerks of Superior 
Court 

(100) 



Original Jurisdiction 
Misdemeanor cases not 
assigned to magistrates; 
probable cause hearings; 
civil cases $10,000* or 
less; juvenile proceedings; 
domestic relations; 
involuntary commitments 



Magistrates 

(644) 



Original Jurisdiction 
Accept certain misdemeanor 
guilty pleas and admissions 
of responsibility to infractions; 
worthless check misdemeanors 
$1,000 or less; small claims 
$1,500 or less 



( 1 ) Appeals from the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court are by right in cases involving constitutional questions, and cases in which there has been dissent in the 
Court of Appeals. In its discretion, the Supreme Court may review Court of Appeals decisions in cases of significant public interest or cases involving legal 
principles of major significance. 

(2) Appeals from these agencies lie directly to the Court of Appeals. 

(3) As a matter of right, appeals go directly to the Supreme Court in first degTee murder cases in which the defendent has been sentenced to death or life imprisonment, 
and in Utilities Commission general rate cases. In all other cases appeal as of right is to the Court of Appeals. In its discretion, the Supreme Court may hear appeals 
directly from the trial courts in cases of significant public interest, cases involving legal principles of major significance, where delay would cause substantial harm, 
or when the Court of Appeals docket is unusually full. 



*The district and superior courts have concurrent original jurisdiction in civil actions (G.S. 7A-242). However, the district court division is the proper division for 
the trial of civil actions in which the amount in controversy is $10,000 or less; and the superior court division is the proper division for the trial of civil actions in 
which the amount in controversy exceeds $10,000 (G.S. 7A-243). 



THE PRESENT COURT SYSTEM 



Article IV of the North Carolina Constitution establishes the 
General Court of Justice which "shall constitute a unified 
judicial system for purposes of jurisdiction, operation, and 
administration, and shall consist of an Appellate Division, a 
Superior Court Division, and a District Court Division." 

The Appellate Division consists of the Supreme Court and 
the Court of Appeals. 

The Superior Court Division is composed of the superior 
courts, which hold sessions in the county seats of the 100 
counties of the State. There are 60 superior court districts. 
Some superior court districts comprise one county, some 
comprise two or more counties, and the more populous 
counties are divided into two or more districts for purposes of 
election of superior court judges. One or more superior court 
judges are elected for each of the superior court districts. A 
clerk of the superior court for each county is elected by the 
voters of the county. 

The District Court Division comprises the district courts. 
The General Assembly is authorized to divide the State into a 
convenient number of local court districts and prescribe where 
the district courts shall sit, but district court must sit in at least 
one place in each county. There are 35 district court districts, 
with each district composed of one or more counties. One or 
more district court judges are elected for each of the district 
court districts. The Constitution also provides that one or more 
magistrates "who shall be officers of the district court" shall be 
appointed in each county. 

The State Constitution (Art. IV, Sec. 1) also contains the 
term, "judicial department," stating that "The General Assem- 
bly shall have no power to deprive the judicial department of 
any power or jurisdiction that rightfully pertains to it as a 
co-ordinate department of the government, nor shall it establish 
or authorize any courts other than as permitted by this Article." 
The terms, "General Court of Justice" and "Judicial Depart- 
ment" are almost, but not quite, synonymous. It may be said 
that the Judicial Department encompasses all of the levels of 
court designated as the General Court of Justice plus all 
administrative and ancillary services within the Judicial 
Department. 

The original jurisdictions and routes of appeal between the 
several levels of court in North Carolina's system of courts are 
illustrated in the chart on the previous page. 

Criminal Cases 

Trial of misdemeanor cases is within the original jurisdiction 
of the district courts. Some misdemeanor offenses are tried by 
magistrates, who are also empowered to accept pleas of guilty 
and admissions of responsibility to certain offenses and impose 
fines in accordance with a schedule set by the Conference of 
Chief District Court Judges. Most trials of misdemeanors are 
by district court judges, who also hold preliminary, "probable 
cause" hearings in felony cases. Trial of felony cases is within 
the jurisdiction of the superior courts. 

Decisions of magistrates may be appealed to the district 
court judge. In criminal cases there is no trial by jury available 
at the district court level; appeal from the district courts' 
judgments in criminal cases is to the superior courts for trial de 



novo before a jury. Except in life-imprisonment or death 
sentence first degree murder cases (which are appealed to the 
Supreme Court), appeals of right from the superior courts are to 
the Court of Appeals. 

Civil Cases 

The 100 clerks of superior court are ex officio judges of 
probate and have original jurisdiction in probate and estate 
matters. The clerks also have jurisdiction over such special 
proceedings as adoptions, partitions, condemnations under the 
authority of eminent domain, and foreclosures. Rulings of the 
clerk may be appealed to the superior court. 

The district courts have original jurisdiction in juvenile 
proceedings, domestic relations cases, petitions for involuntary 
commitment to a mental hospital, and are the "proper" courts 
for general civil cases where the amount in controversy is 
$10,000 or less. If the amount in controversy is $1,500 or less 
and the plaintiff in the case so requests, the chief district court 
judge may assign the case for initial hearing by a magistrate. 
Magistrates' decisions may be appealed to the district court. 
Trial by jury for civil cases is available in the district courts; 
appeal from the judgment of a district court in a civil case is to 
the North Carolina Court of Appeals. 

The superior courts are the proper courts for trial of general 
civil cases where the amount in controversy is more than 
$10,000. Appeals from decisions of most administrative 
agencies are first within the jurisdiction of the superior courts. 
Appeal from the superior courts in civil cases is to the Court of 
Appeals. 

Administration 

The North Carolina Supreme Court has the "general power 
to supervise and control the proceedings of any of the other 
courts of the General Court of Justice." (G.S. 7A-32(b)). 

In addition to this grant of general supervisory power, the 
North Carolina General Statutes provide certain Judicial 
Department officials with specific powers and responsibilities 
for the operation of the court system. The Supreme Court has 
the responsibility for prescribing rules of practice and procedures 
for the appellate courts and for prescribing rules for the trial 
courts to supplement those prescribed by statute. The Chief 
Justice of the Supreme Court designates one of the judges of the 
Court of Appeals to be its Chief Judge, who in turn is 
responsible for scheduling the sessions of the Court of Appeals. 

The chart following illustrates specific trial court admini- 
strative responsibilities vested in Judicial Department officials 
by statute. The Chief Justice appoints the Director and 
Assistant Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts; 
the Assistant Director also serves as the Chief Justice's 
administrative assistant. The schedule of sessions of superior 
court in the 100 counties is set by the Supreme Court; 
assignment of the State's rotating superior court judges is the 
responsibility of the Chief Justice. Finally, the Chief Justice 
designates a chief district court judge for each of the State's 35 
district court districts from among the elected district court 
judges of the respective districts. These judges have 



10 



The Present Court System, Continued 



responsibilities for the scheduling of the district courts and 
magistrates' courts within their respective districts, along with 
other administrative responsibilities. 

The Administrative Office of the Courts is responsible for 
direction of non-judicial, administrative and business affairs of 
the Judicial Department. Included among its functions are 
fiscal management, personnel services, information and statis- 
tical services, supervision of record keeping in the trial court 
clerks' offices, liaison with the legislative and executive 
departments of government, court facility evaluation, purchase 
and contract, education and training, coordination of the 
program for provision of legal counsel to indigent persons, 
juvenile probation and aftercare, guardian ad litem services, 



trial court administrator services, planning, and general 
administrative services. 

The clerk of superior court in each county acts as clerk for 
both the superior and district courts. Until 1980, the clerk also 
served as chairman of the county's calendar committee, which 
set the civil case calendars. Effective July 1, 1980, these 
committees were eliminated; day-to-day calendaring of civil 
cases is now done by the clerk of superior court or by a "trial 
court administrator" in some districts, under the supervision of 
the senior resident superior court judge and chief district court 
judge. The criminal case calendars in both superior courts and 
district courts are set by the district attorney of the respective 
district. 



11 



THE PRESENT COURT SYSTEM 

Principal Administrative Authorities for North Carolina Trial Courts 




CHIEF JUSTICE 

and 

SUPREME COURT 



2 

A 



Administrative 

Office of 

the Courts 



4 



(36) District 
Attorneys 



(44) Senior Resident 

Judges; (100) Clerks 

of Superior Court 

SUPERIOR 
COURTS 




(35) Chief District 
Court Judges 

DISTRICT 
COURTS 



'The Supreme Court has general supervisory authority over the operations of the superior courts (as well as other trial courts). The 
schedule of superior courts is approved by the Supreme Court; assignments of superior court judges, who rotate from district to 
district, are the responsibility of the Chief Justice. 

2 The Director and an Assistant Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts are appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the 

Chief Justice. 

3 The Supreme Court has general supervisory authority over the operations of the district courts (as well as other trial courts). The 
Chief Justice appoints a chief district court judge in each of the 35 district court districts from the judges elected in the respective 

districts. 

4 The Administrative Office of the Courts is empowered to prescribe a variety of rules governing the operation of the offices of the 100 
clerks of superior court, and to obtain statistical data and other information from officials in the Judicial Department. 

5 The district attorney sets the criminal case trial calendars. In each district, the senior resident superior court judge and the chief 
district court judge are empowered to supervise the calendaring procedures for civil cases in their respective courts. 

6 In addition to certain judicial functions, the clerk of superior court performs administrative, fiscal and record-keeping functions for 
both the superior court and district court of the county. Magistrates, who serve under the supervision of the chief district court judge, 
are appointed by the senior resident superior court judge from nominees submitted by the clerk of superior court. 



12 



THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA 

(As of June 30, 1989) 



Chief Justice 
JAMES G. EXUM, JR. 



LOUIS B. MEYER 
BURLEY B. MITCHELL, JR. 
HARRY C. MARTIN 



Associate Justices 



HENRY E. FRYE 

JOHN WEBB 

WILLIS P. WHICHARD 



Retired Chief Justices 

WILLIAM H. BOBBITT 

SUSIE SHARP 

JOSEPH BRANCH 



I. BEVERLY LAKE 
J. FRANK HUSKINS 



Retired Justices 



DAVID M. BRITT 



Clerk 
J. Gregory Wallace 



Librarian 
Louise H. Stafford 




Chief Justice Exum 



13 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 



The Supreme Court 



At the apex of the North Carolina court system is the 
seven-member Supreme Court, which sits in Raleigh to 
consider and decide questions of law presented in civil and 
criminal cases on appeal. The Chief Justice and six associate 
justices are elected to eight-year terms by the voters of the State. 
There are two terms of the Supreme Court each year: a Spring 
Term commencing on the first Tuesday in February and a Fall 
Term commencing on the first Tuesday in September. The 
Court does not sit in panels. It sits only en banc, that is, all 
members sitting on each case. 

Jurisdiction 

The only original case jurisdiction exercised by the Supreme 
Court is in the censure and removal of judges upon the (non- 
binding) recommendations of the Judicial Standards Commis- 
sion. The Court's appellate jurisdiction includes: 

- cases on appeal by right from the Court of Appeals (cases 
involving substantial constitutional questions and cases 
in which there has been dissent in the Court of Appeals); 

- cases on appeal by right from the Utilities Commission 
(cases involving final order or decision in a general rate 
matter); 

- criminal cases on appeal by right from the superior courts 
(first degree murder cases in which the defendant has 
been sentenced to death or life imprisonment); and 

- cases in which review has been granted in the Supreme 
Court's discretion. 

Discretionary review by the Supreme Court directly from 
the trial courts may be granted when delay would likely cause 
substantial harm or when the workload of the Appellate 
Division is such that the expeditious administration of justice 
requires it. However, most appeals are heard only after review 
by the Court of Appeals. 

Administration 

The Supreme Court has general power to supervise and 
control the proceedings of the other courts of the General Court 
of Justice. The Court has specific power to prescribe the rules of 
practice and procedure for the trial court divisions, consistent 
with any rules enacted by the General Assembly. The schedule 
of superior court sessions in the 100 counties is approved yearly 
by the Supreme Court. The Clerk of the Supreme Court, the 
Librarian of the Supreme Court Library, and the Appellate 
Division Reporter are appointed by the Supreme Court. 



The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court appoints the 
Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts and an 
Assistant Director, who serve at the pleasure of the Chief 
Justice. He also designates a Chief Judge from among the 
judges of the Court of Appeals and a Chief District Court Judge 
from among the district judges in each of the State's 35 district 
court districts. He assigns superior court judges, who regularly 
rotate from district to district, to the scheduled sessions of 
superior court in the 100 counties, and he is also empowered to 
transfer district court judges to other districts for temporary or 
specialized duty. The Chief Justice appoints three of the seven 
members of the Judicial Standards Commission — a judge of 
the Court of Appeals who serves as the Commission's 
chairman, one superior court judge and one district court judge. 
The Chief Justice also appoints six of the 24 voting members of 
the North Carolina Courts Commission: one associate justice of 
the Supreme Court, one Court of Appeals judge, two superior 
court judges, and two district court judges. The Chief Justice 
also appoints the Appellate Defender, and the Chief Admini- 
strative Law Judge of the Office of Administrative Hearings. 



Expenses of the Court, 1988-89 

Operating expenses of the Supreme Court during the 1988- 
89 fiscal year amounted to $2,650,035, an increase of 1 2.6% 
over total 1987-88 expenditures of $2,352,654. Expenditures 
for the Supreme Court during 1988-89 constituted 1.5% of all 
General Fund expenditures for the operation of the entire 
Judicial Department during the fiscal year. 



Case Data, 1988-89 

A total of 270 appealed cases were before the Supreme 
Court during the fiscal year, 93 that were pending on July 1, 
1988, plus 177 cases filed through June 30, 1989. A total of 
1 54 of these cases were disposed of, leaving 1 16 cases pending 
on June 30, 1989. 

A total of 531 petitions (requests to appeal) were before the 
Court during the 1988-89 year, with 397 disposed during the 
year and 134 pending as of June 30, 1989. The Court granted 
71 petitions for review during 1988-89 compared to 67 for 
1987-88. 

More detailed data on the Court's workload are presented on 
the following pages. 



14 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 

Supreme Court Caseload Inventory 

July 1, 1988-June 30, 1989 



Petitions for Review 

Civil domestic 

Juvenile 

Other civil 

Criminal 

Postconviction remedy 

Administrative agency decision 

Total Petitions for Review 



Pending 






Pending 


7/1/88 


Filed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


2 


14 


8 


X 





6 


5 


1 


48 


196 


197 


47 


25 


185 


144 


66 


6 


41 


38 


9 


3 


5 


5 


3 



84 



447 



397 



134 



Appeals 

Civil domestic 

Petitions for review granted that became civil domestic appeals 

Juvenile 

Petitions for review granted that became juvenile appeals 

Other civil 

Petitions for review granted that became other civil appeals 

Criminal, defendant sentenced to death 

Criminal, defendant sentenced to life imprisonment 

Other criminal 

Petitions for review granted that became other criminal appeals 

Petitions for review granted that became postconviction 

remedy cases 
Administrative agency decision 
Petitions for review granted that became appeals of 

administrative agency decision 

Total Appeals 

Other Proceedings 

Rule 16(b) additional issues re dissent 

Requests for advisory opinion 

Rule amendments 

Motions 

Rule 31 Petitions to Rehear 

Total Other Proceedings 






I 


1 





1 


4 


4 


1 

















1 


1 





8 


30 


19 


19 


23 


43 


42 


24 


21 


23 


14 


30 


23 


33 


41 


15 


5 


12 


11 


6 


9 


17 


12 


14 














3 


10 


9 


4 





3 





3 


93 


177 


154 


116 





16 


16 




















38 


38 








616 


616 





4 


11 


13 


2 



681 



683 



15 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 

APPEALS FILED IN THE SUPREME COURT 
JULY 1, 1988 — JUNE 30, 1989 



CRIMINAL-DEATH 



CRIMINAL LIFE 



ADMIN. AGENCY 



DOMESTIC RELATIONS 




OTHER CIVIL 



OTHER CRIMINAL 



PETITIONS FILED IN THE SUPREME COURT 
JULY 1, 1988 — JUNE 30, 1989 



OTHER CIVIL 



JUVENILE 1.3% (6) 



CRIMINAL 




ADMIN. AGENCY 1.1% (5) 
DOMESTIC RELATIONS 3.1% (14) 



POSTCONVICTION 



16 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 
Supreme Court Caseload Types by Superior Court District and Division 

July 1, 1988-June 30, 1989 



Judicial 


Superior Court 


Total 


Death 


Life 


Other 


Civil 


Other 


Cases 


Division 


District 


Cases 


Cases 


Cases 


Criminal 


Cases 


Cases 


Disposed 


I 


1 


6 


1 


4 


1 








3 




2 


4 





3 





1 





2 




3A 


5 


1 


1 


2 


1 





2 




3B 


5 





1 





4 





1 




4A 


2 


1 








1 





1 




4B 


6 


3 


1 


1 


1 





3 




5 


10 


3 


5 


1 


1 





3 




6A 


5 


4 








1 





1 




6B 


7 


1 


2 


3 


1 





4 




7A 


3 


1 








2 





2 




7B-C 


2 





1 


1 








2 




8A 


2 





1 


1 













8B 


3 





3 











1 


SUBTOTAL 




60 


15 


22 


10 


13 





25 


II 


9 


5 


2 





1 


2 





2 




10 


49 


5 


3 


3 


19 


19 


25 




11 


6 


1 


2 





3 





4 




12 


18 


3 


9 


4 


2 





6 




13 


2 


2 














1 




14 


16 


3 


2 


3 


8 





8 




15A 


4 





1 





3 





3 




15B 


7 





1 


1 


5 





5 




16A 


3 


3 



















16B 


8 


6 





1 





1 


4 


SUBTOTAL 




118 


25 


18 


13 


42 


20 


58 


III 


17A 


5 


2 


1 


1 


1 





11 




17B 


1 


1 



















18 


17 


2 


3 


2 


10 





11 




19A 


3 


1 


1 


1 








1 




19B 


3 


1 





1 


1 





1 




19C 


2 





2 
















20A 


6 


2 


2 





2 





3 




20B 


2 


1 








1 





2 




21 


15 





7 


2 


5 


1 


7 




22 


8 


4 








3 


1 


1 




23 


6 


1 


1 


2 


2 





5 


SUBTOTAL 




68 


15 


17 


9 


25 


2 


32 


IV 


24 


3 








2 


1 





1 




25A 


5 


3 


1 





1 





1 




25B 


4 





3 





1 





1 




26 


21 


2 


2 


5 


9 


3 


13 




27A 


4 


1 


1 


2 








2 




27B 


4 





1 


1 


2 





3 




28 


12 


1 


4 


1 


5 


1 


7 




29 


9 


2 


5 


1 


1 





4 




30A 


2 











2 





2 




30B 


5 





3 





2 





5 


SUBTOTAL 




69 


9 


20 


12 


24 


4 


39 



TOTALS 315 64 77 44 104 26 

NOTE: Includes life & death sentence cases awaiting Record on Appeal and not yet formally docketed. 



154 



17 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 



Submission of Cases Reaching Decision Stage in Supreme Court 
July 1, 1988-June 30, 1989 



Cases Argued 

Civil Domestic 

Juvenile 

Other Civil 

Criminal (death sentence) 

Criminal (life sentence) 

Other Criminal 

Administrative Agency Decision 

Total cases argued 

Submissions Without Argument 

By motion of the parties (Appellate Rule 30 (d)) 
By order of the Court (Appellate Rule 30 (f)) 

Total submissions without argument 

Total Cases Reaching Decision Stage 



5 
1 
73 
23 
47 
26 
10 

185 



1 
1 

2 
187 



Disposition of Petitions and Other Proceedings by the Supreme Court 
July 1, 1988-June 30, 1989 



Granted* 


Denied 


4 


4 


1 


4 


44 


146 


19 


119 





13 


3 


2 



71 



288 



Petitions for Review 

Civil Domestic 

Juvenile 

Other Civil 

Criminal 

Postconviction Remedy 

Administrative Agency Decision 

Total Petitions for Review 

Other Proceedings 

Rule 16(b) — Additional Issues 

Advisory Opinion 

Rule Amendments 

Motions 

Rule 31 Petitions to Rehear 

Total Other Proceedings 

•"GRANTED" includes orders allowing relief without accepting the case as a full appeal. 



Dismissed/ 
Withdrawn 



7 
6 
25 


38 



Total 
Disposed 

8 

5 

197 

144 

38 

5 

397 



16 



38 

616 

13 

683 



\H 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 
Disposition of Supreme Court Appeals With Signed Opinions 











Reversed 




Total 


Case Types 


Affirmed 


Modified 


Reversed 


Remanded 


Remanded 


Disposed 


Civil domestic 


2 














2 


Juvenile 











1 





1 


Other civil 


15 


5 


6 


19 





45 


Criminal (death sentence) 


8 





1 


3 


1 


13 


Criminal (life sentence) 


31 








7 





38 


Other criminal 


4 





6 


3 





13 


Postconviction remedy 




















Administrative agency decision 


7 














7 



Totals 



67 



13 



33 



119 



Disposition of Supreme Court Appeals with Per Curiam Decisions 











Reversed 




Total 


Case Types 


Affirmed 


Modified 


Reversed 


Remanded 


Remanded 


Disposed 


Civil domestic 


2 














2 


Juvenile 




















Other civil 


9 








2 





11 


Criminal (death sentence) 




















Criminal (life sentence) 




















Other criminal 


5 


1 





1 





7 


Postconviction remedy 




















Administrative agency decision 


1 





1 








2 



Totals 



17 







22 



Disposition of Supreme Court Appeals by Dismissal or Withdrawal 
Case Types 



Dismissed or 
Withdrawn 



Civil domestic 

Juvenile 

Other civil 

Criminal (death sentence) 

Criminal (life sentence) 

Other criminal 

Postconviction remedy 

Administrative agency decision 

Totals 



1 

5 
1 

3 
3 



13 



19 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 

MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF APPEALS IN THE SUPREME COURT 

JULY 1, 1988-JUNE 30, 1989 



DISMISSED/WITHDRAWN 




OPINIONS 



PER CURIAM DECISIONS 



TYPE OF DISPOSITION OF PETITIONS FOR REVIEW IN THE SUPREME COURT 

JULY 1, 1988-JUNE 30, 1989 



DENIED 



GRANTED 




DISMISSED/WITHDRAWN 



20 



NORTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT 
Appeals Docketed and Disposed of During the Years 1983-84—1988-89 



400 



I 



Appeals Docketed 
Appeals Disposed of 



300 



N 
U 
M 
B 
E 
R 

O 200 
F 

C 
A 
S 
E 
S 



100 



227 




200 



196 



216 



145 



177 



154 



1983-84 1984-85 1985-86 1986-87 1987-88 1988-89 



21 



NORTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT 

Petitions Docketed and Allowed During the Years 1983-84—1988-89 



800 



N 

I 

M 

B 

I 

R 

O 
F 

C 

\ 

s 
[ 
s 



600 



400 



I 



200 



Petitions Docketed 
Petitions Allowed 



733 



547 



70 




447 



67 



1983-84 



1984-85 



1985-86 



1986-87 



1987-88 



71 



1988-89 



22 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 



Supreme Court Processing Time for Disposed Cases 

(Total time in days from docketing to decision) 

July 1, 1988- June 30, 1989 



Civil domestic 

Petitions for review granted that became civil domestic appeals 

Juvenile 

Petitions for review granted that became juvenile appeals 

Other civil 

Petitions for review granted that became other civil appeals 

Criminal, defendant sentenced to death 

Criminal, defendant sentenced to life imprisonment 

Other criminal 

Petitions for review granted that became other criminal appeals 

Petitions for review granted that became postconviction remedy cases 

Administrative agency decision 

Petitions for review granted that became appeals of administrative 
agency decision 

Total appeals 



Number 


(Days) 


(Days) 


of Cases 


Median 


Mean 


1 


309 


309.0 


4 


133 


136.5 











1 


156 


156.0 


19 


210 


194.6 


42 


208 


223.5 


14 


499 


512.1 


41 


279 


280.6 


11 


140 


178.4 


12 


201 


267.5 











9 


380 


400.4 











154 


237 


269.8 



23 



THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA* 



Chief Judge 
R. A. HEDRICK 



GERALD ARNOLD 
HUGH A. WELLS 
CHARLES L. BECTON 
CLIFTON E. JOHNSON 
EUGENE H. PHILLIPS 
SIDNEY S. EAGLES, JR. 



Judges 



SARAH PARKER 

JACK COZORT 

ROBERT F. ORR 

K. EDWARD GREENE 

JOHN B. LEWIS, JR. 



FRANK M. PARKER 
EDWARD B. CLARK 
ROBERT M. MARTIN 



Retired Judges 



CECIL J. HILL 
E. MAURICE BRASWELL 



Clerk 
FRANCIS E. DAIL 



*Asof30 June 1989 



24 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 



The Court of Appeals 



The 12-judge Court of Appeals is North Carolina's inter- 
mediate appellate court; it hears a majority of the appeals 
originating from the State's trial courts. The Court regularly sits 
in Raleigh, and it may sit in other locations in the State as 
authorized by the Supreme Court. Sessions outside of Raleigh 
have not been regular or frequent. Judges of the Court of 
Appeals are elected by popular vote for eight-year terms. A 
Chief Judge for the Court is designated by the Chief Justice of 
the Supreme Court and serves in that capacity at the pleasure of 
the Chief Justice. 

Cases are heard by panels of three judges, with the Chief 
Judge responsible for assigning members of the Court to the 
four panels. Insofar as practicable, each judge is to be assigned 
to sit a substantially equal number of times with each other 
judge. The Chief Judge presides over the panel of which he or 
she is a member and designates a presiding judge for the other 
panels. 

One member of the Court of Appeals, designated by the 
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, serves as chairman of the 
Judicial Standards Commission. 

Jurisdiction 

The bulk of the caseload of the Court of Appeals consists of 
cases appealed from the trial courts. The Court also hears 
appeals directly from the Industrial Commission, along with 
appeals from certain final orders or decisions of the North 
Carolina State Bar, the Commissioner of Insurance, the Board 
of State Contract Appeals, the Department of Human Re- 
sources, the Commissioner of Banks, the Administrator of 
Savings and Loans, the Governor's Waste Management Board, 



the Property Tax Commission, and the Utilities Commission 
(in cases other than general rate cases). Appeals from the 
decisions of other administrative agencies lie first within the 
jurisdiction of the superior courts. 

In the event of a recommendation from the Judicial 
Standards Commission to censure or remove from office a 
justice of the Supreme Court, the (non-binding) recommenda- 
tion would be considered by the Chief Judge and the six judges 
next senior in service on the Court of Appeals (excluding the 
judge who serves as the Commission's chair). Such seven- 
member panel would have sole jurisdiction to act upon the 
Commission's recommendation. 

Expenses of the Court, 1988-89 

Operating expenses of the Court of Appeals during the 
1988-89 fiscal year totalled $3,352,986, an increase of 6.2% 
over 1987-88 expenditures of $3,158,383. Expenditures for the 
Court of Appeals during 1988-89 amounted to 1.9% of all 
General Fund expenditures for operation of the entire Judicial 
Department during the fiscal year. 

Case Data, 1988-89 

A total of 1 ,4 1 8 appealed cases were filed before the Court of 
Appeals during the period July 1 , 1 988 - June 30, 1 989. A total 
of 1 , 1 88 cases were disposed of during the same period. During 
1988-89, a total of 385 petitions and 1,435 motions were filed 
before the Court of Appeals. 

Further detail on the workload of the Court of Appeals is 
shown in the table and graph on the following pages. 



25 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 
July 1, 1988-June 30, 1989 



Cases on Appeal 

Civil cases appealed from district courts 
Civil cases appealed from superior courts 
Civil cases appealed from administrative agencies 
Criminal cases appealed from superior courts 

Total 



Filings 

276 

622 

43 

477 

1,418 



Dispositions 



1,188 



Petitions 

Allowed 

Denied 

Remanded 

Total 



385 



40 

345 


385 



Motions 

Allowed 

Denied 

Remanded 



Total 



Total Cases on Appeal, Petitions and Motions 





1,029 

406 




1,435 


1,435 


3,238 


3,008 



MANNER OF CASE DISPOSITIONS — COURT OF APPEALS 
July 1, 1988-June 30, 1989 



Cases Disposed by Written Opinion 



Cases 
Affirmed 

719 



Cases 
Reversed 

214 



Cases Affirmed 

In Part, Reversed 

In Part 

101 



Other Cases 
Disposed 

154 



Total Cases 
Disposed 

1,188 



26 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 
Fiscal Years 1983-84 Through 1988-89 



3000 



2500 



N 
U 
M 
B 
E 
R 

O 
F 

C 

A 
S 
F 

S 



2000 



1500 



1000 



500 




1983-84 1984-85 1985-86 1986-87 1987-88 1988-89 



Filings and dispositions in this graph include appealed cases and petitions (not motions) in the Court of Appeals. 



27 



ON 

4^ oo 

*H On 



O 



U 



o 



2 






o 



00 

25 

Si 

t5 .a 

A 5 




2X 



CZ3 

o 



o 
U 

e 



CO 



Q 



o 
o 



oo 
On 



C3 O 



00 







29 



o 

1— I 



c3 



O oo 
O g 



&h 



O 

U 

o 

Z 




30 



JUDGES OF SUPERIOR COURT* 
(As of June 30, 1989) 



FIRST DIVISION 



District 

1 



2 

3A 
3B 
4A 
4B 

5 

6A 
6B 

7A 

7B 

7C 

8A 
8B 



10A 
10B 

IOC 
10D 

11 

12A 
12B 
12C 



13 

14A 
14B 



15A 
15B 
16A 
16B 



*J. Herbert Small, Elizabeth City 
Thomas S. Watts, Elizabeth City 

♦William C. Griffin, Jr., Williamston 

*David E. Reid, Jr., Greenville 

♦Herbert O. Phillips, III, Morehead City 

*Henry L. Stevens, III, Kenansville 

*James R. Strickland, Jacksonville 

*Napoleon B. Barefoot, Wilmington 
Ernest B. Fullwood, Wilmington 

♦Richard B. Allsbrook, Roanoke Rapids 

*Cy Anthony Grant, Sr., Windsor 

*Charles B. Winberry, Rocky Mount 

G. K. Butterfield, Jr., Wilson 
*Frank R. Brown, Tarboro 

*James D. Llewellyn, Kinston 

*Paul M. Wright, Goldsboro 

SECOND DIVISION 

*Robert H. Hobgood, Louisburg 
Henry W. Hight, Jr., Henderson 

George R. Greene, Raleigh 
*Robert L. Farmer, Raleigh 
Henry V. Barnette, Jr., Raleigh 
Howard E. Manning, Jr., Raleigh 
Donald W. Stephens, Raleigh 

*Wiley F. Bowen, Dunn 

*D. B. Herring, Jr., Fayetteville 
Gregory A. Weeks, Fayetteville 
Coy E. Brewer, Jr., Fayetteville 
E. Lynn Johnson, Fayetteville 

*Giles R. Clark, Elizabethtown 

Orlando F. Hudson, Jr., Durham 
*Anthony M. Brannon, Durham 
J. Milton Read, Jr., Durham 
A. Leon Stanback, Jr., Durham 

*J. B. Allen, Jr., Burlington 

*F. Gordon Battle, Hillsborough 

*B. Craig Ellis, Laurinburg 

*Joe Freeman Britt, Lumberton 
Dexter Brooks, Lumberton 



THIRD DIVISION 
District 

17A *Melzer A. Morgan, Jr., Wentworth 

17B * James M. Long, Pilot Mountain 

18A W. Steven Allen, Sr., Greensboro 

18B Howard R. Greeson, Jr., Greensboro 

18C *W. Douglas Albright, Greensboro 

18D Thomas W. Ross, Greensboro 

18E Joseph R. John, Greensboro 

19A * James C. Davis, Concord 

19B *Russell G. Walker, Jr., Asheboro 

19C *Thomas W. Seay, Jr., Spencer 

20A *F. Fetzer Mills, Wadesboro 

20B *William H. Helms, Monroe 

21 A James J. Booker, Winston-Salem 
21 B *Judson D. DeRamus, Jr., Winston-Salem 
21 C William H. Freeman, Winston-Salem 
James A. Beaty, Jr., Winston-Salem 



21D 

22 



*Preston Cornelius, Mooresville 
Lester P. Martin, Jr., Mocksville 



23 *Julius A. Rousseau, Jr., North Wilkesboro 



24 



FOURTH DIVISION 

*Charles C. Lamm, Jr., Boone 



25A *Claude S. Sitton, Morganton 
25B *Forrest A. Ferrell, Hickory 

26A W. Terry Sherrill, Charlotte 
Shirley L. Fulton, Charlotte 

26B *Frank W. Snepp, Jr., Charlotte 
Kenneth A. Griffin, Charlotte 

26C Robert M. Burroughs, Charlotte 
Chase B. Saunders, Charlotte 

27A *Robert W. Kirby, Gastonia 
Robert E. Gaines, Gastonia 

27B *John Mull Gardner, Shelby 

28 ""Robert D. Lewis, Asheville 

C. Walter Allen, Asheville 

29 *Hollis M. Owens, Jr., Rutherfordton 
30A *James U. Downs, Franklin 

30B * Janet M. Hyatt, Waynesville 



■"Senior Resident Superior Court Judge 



31 



SPECIAL JUDGES OF SUPERIOR COURT 

Marvin K. Gray, Charlotte 

I. Beverly Lake, Jr., Raleigh 

Samuel T. Currin, Raleigh 



EMERGENCY JUDGES OF SUPERIOR COURT 

Henry A. McKinnon, Jr., Lumberton 

Samuel E. Britt, Lumberton 

James H. Pou Bailey, Raleigh 

John R. Friday, Lincolnton 

D. Marsh McLelland, Graham 

Edward K. Washington, High Point 

L. Bradford Tillery, Wilmington 

Thomas H. Lee, Durham 



The Conference of Superior Court Judges 

(Executive Committee as of June 30, 1989) 

Robert D. Lewis, Asheville, President 

J. Herbert Small, Elizabeth City, President- Elect 

Charles C. Lamm, Jr., Boone, Vice-President 

E. Lynn Johnson, Fayetteville, Secretary-Treasurer 

James M. Long, Pilot Mountain, Immediate Past- President 

Robert H. Hobgood, Louisburg, Ex Officio 

Giles R. Clark, Elizabethtown, and 

Julius A. Rousseau, Jr., North Wilkesboro, 

Additional Executive Committee Members 




Judge Robert D. Lewis 



32 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 



The Superior Courts 



North Carolina's superior courts are the general jurisdiction 
trial courts for the state. In 1988-89, there were 74 "resident" 
superior court judges elected by Statewide ballot to office for 
eight-year terms in the 60 superior court districts. In addition, 
three "special" superior court judges are appointed by the 
Governor. 

Jurisdiction 



The superior court has original jurisdiction in all felony cases 
and in those misdemeanor cases specified under G.S. 7A-271. 
(Most misdemeanors are tried first in the district court, from 
which conviction may be appealed to the superior court for 
trial de novo by a jury. No trial by jury is available for criminal 
cases in district court.) The superior court is the proper court for 
the trial of civil cases where the amount in controversy exceeds 
$10,000, and it has jurisdiction over appeals from administra- 
tive agencies except the Industrial Commission, certain rulings 
of the Commissioner of Insurance, the Board of Examiners of 
the North Carolina State Bar, the Board of State Contract 
Appeals, the Property Tax Commission, the Department of 
Human Resources, the Commissioner of Banks, the Admin- 
istrator of Savings and Loans, the Governor's Waste Manage- 
ment Board, and the Utilities Commission. Appeals from these 
agencies lie directly to the North Carolina Court of Appeals 
(except for Utilities Commission general rate cases, which go 
directly to the Supreme Court). Regardless of the amount in 
controversy, the original civil jurisdiction of the superior court 
does not include domestic relations cases, which are heard in 
the district court, or probate and estates matters and certain 
special proceedings heard first by the clerk of superior court. 
Rulings of the clerk are within the appellate jurisdiction of the 
superior court. 

Administration 

The 100 counties in North Carolina were grouped into 60 
superior court districts as of January 1, 1989. Some superior 
court districts comprise one county; some comprise two or 
more counties; and the more populous counties are divided 
among a "set of districts," composed of two or more districts 
created for purposes of election of superior court judges. Each 
district has at least one resident superior court judge who has 
certain administrative responsibilities for his or her home 



district, such as providing for civil case calendaring procedures. 
(Criminal case calendars are prepared by the district attorneys.) 
In districts or sets of districts with more than one resident 
superior court judge, the judge senior in service on the superior 
court bench exercises these supervisory powers. 

The judicial districts are grouped into four divisions for the 
rotation of superior court judges, as shown on the preceding 
map. Within the division, resident superior court judges are 
required to rotate among the judicial districts, holding court for 
at least six months in each, then moving on to their next 
assignment. A special superior court judge may be assigned to 
hold court in any of the 100 counties. Assignments of all 
superior court judges are made by the Chief Justice of the 
Supreme Court. Under the Constitution of North Carolina, at 
least two sessions (a week each) of superior court are held 
annually in each of the 100 counties. The vast majority of 
counties have more than the constitutional minimum of two 
weeks of superior court annually. Many larger counties have 
superior court sessions about every week in the year. 

Expenditures 

A total of $16,928,560 was expended on the operations of 
the superior courts during the 1988-89 fiscal year. This 
included the salaries and travel expenses for the 77 superior 
court judges, and salaries and expenses for court reporters and 
secretarial staff for superior court judges. The 1988-89 expendi- 
ture for the superior courts amounted to 9.6% of the total 
General Fund expenditures for the operations of the entire 
Judicial Department during the 1988-89 fiscal year. 

Caseload 

Including both civil and criminal cases, a total of 1 18,188 
cases were filed in the superior courts during 1988-89, an 
increase of 12,484 cases ( 1 1 .8%) from the total of 105,704 cases 
that were filed in 1987-88. There were increases in filings in all 
case categories: civil cases, felony cases, and misdemeanor 
cases. 

Superior court case dispositions increased from 100,808 in 
1987-88 to 111,278 in 1988-89. Dispositions in all case 
categories increased. 

More detailed information on the flow of cases through the 
superior courts is included in Part IV of this Report. 



33 



DISTRICT COURT JUDGES* 



(As of June 30, 1989) 



District 

1 John T. Chaffin, Elizabeth City 
Grafton G. Beaman, Elizabeth City 
John R. Parker. Manteo 

2 Hallett S. Ward. Washington 
Samuel G. Grimes, Washington 
James W. Hardison, Williamston 

3 E. Burt Aycock, Jr., Greenville 
David A. Leech, Greenville 

Willie L. Lumpkin, III, Morehead City 
James E. Martin, Bethel 
James E. Ragan, III, Oriental 
H. Horton Rountree, Greenville 
Wilton R. Duke, Jr., Greenville 

4 Kenneth W. Turner, Rose Hill 
William M. Cameron, Jr., Jacksonville 
Wayne G. Kimble, Jr., Jacksonville 
Leonard W. Thagard, Clinton 
Stephen M. Williamson, Kenansville 

5 Gilbert H. Burnett, Wilmington 
Jacqueline Morris-Goodson, Wilmington 
Charles E. Rice, III, Wilmington 

Elton Glenn Tucker, Wilmington 
John W. Smith, II, Wilmington 

6 Nicholas Long, Roanoke Rapids 
Harold P. McCoy, Scotland Neck 
Robert E. Williford, Lewiston 

7 George Britt, Tarboro 
Allen W. Harrell, Wilson 
Quentin T. Sumner, Rocky Mount 
Albert S. Thomas, Jr., Wilson 
Sarah F. Patterson, Rocky Mount 

8 J. Patrick Exum, Kinston 
Kenneth R. Ellis, Goldsboro 
Rodney R. Goodman, Kinston 
Arnold O. Jones, Goldsboro 
Joseph E. Setzer, Jr., Goldsboro 

9 Claude W. Allen, Jr., Oxford 

H. Weldon Lloyd, Jr., Henderson 
J. Larry Senter, Franklinton 
Charles W. Wilkinson, Jr., Oxford 

10 George F. Bason, Raleigh 
Stafford G. Bullock, Raleigh 
William A. Creech, Raleigh 
James R. Fullwood, Raleigh 
Joyce A. Hamilton, Raleigh 
Jerry W. Leonard, Raleigh 
Fred M. Morelock, Raleigh 
Louis W. Payne, Jr., Raleigh 
Russell G. Sherrill, III, Raleigh 
Donald W. Overby, Raleigh 



District 

1 1 William A. Christian, Sanford 
Samuel S. Stephenson, Angier 
Edward H. McCormick, Lillington 
O. Henry Willis, Jr., Dunn 
Tyson Y. Dobson, Jr., Smithfield 

12 Sol G. Cherry, Fayetteville 
John S. Hair, Jr., Fayetteville 
James F. Ammons, Jr., Fayetteville 
A. Elizabeth Keever, Fayetteville 
Patricia Timmons-Goodson, Fayetteville 

13 William C. Gore, Jr., Whiteville 
D. Jack Hooks, Jr., Whiteville 
Jerry A. Jolly, Tabor City 
David G. Wall, Elizabethtown 

14 David Q. LaBarre, Durham 
Richard Chaney, Durham 
William Y. Manson, Durham 
Carolyn D. Johnson, Durham 
Kenneth C. Titus, Durham 

15A W. S. Harris, Jr., Graham 
Spencer B. Ennis, Burlington 
James K. Washburn, Burlington 

15B Stanley Peele, Chapel Hill 
Lowry M. Betts, Pittsboro 
Patricia S. Hunt, Chapel Hill 

16A Warren L. Pate, Raeford 

16B Charles G. McLean, Lumberton 
Robert F. Floyd, Jr., Fairmont 
J. Stanley Carmical, Lumberton 
Herbert L. Richardson, Lumberton 
Gary L. Locklear, Pembroke 

17A Peter M. McHugh, Reidsville 
Robert R. Blackwell, Reidsville 
Philip W. Allen, Yanceyville 

17B Jerry Cash Martin, Mount Airy 
Clarence W. Carter, King 

18 J. Bruce Morton, Greensboro 
Sherry F. Alloway, Greensboro 
Robert E. Bencini, Jr., High Point 
William L. Daisy, Greensboro 
Edmund Lowe, High Point 
Lawrence C. McSwain, Greensboro 
Thomas G. Foster, Jr., Greensboro 
William A. Vaden, Greensboro 
Joseph E. Turner, Greensboro 

19A Frank M. Montgomery, Salisbury 
Robert M. Davis, Salisbury 
Adam C. Grant, Jr., Concord 
Clarence E. Horton, Jr., Kannapolis 



•The Chief District Court Judge for each district is listed first. 



34 



DISTRICT COURT JUDGES* 



(As of June 30, 1989) 



District 

19B William M. Neely, Asheboro 
Richard M. Toomes, Asheboro 
Vance B. Long, Asheboro 

20 Donald R. Huffman, Wadesboro 
Michael E. Beale, Pinehurst 
Ronald W. Burris, Albemarle 
Kenneth W. Honeycutt, Monroe 
Tanya T. Wallace, Rockingham 

21 Abner Alexander, Winston-Salem 
Loretta C. Biggs, Kernersville 
James A. Harrill, Jr., Winston-Salem 
Roland H. Hayes, Winston-Salem 
Robert Kason Keiger, Winston-Salem 
William B. Reingold, Winston-Salem 
Margaret L. Sharpe, Winston-Salem 

22 Robert W. Johnson, Statesville 
Samuel A. Cathey, Statesville 
George T. Fuller, Lexington 
Kimberly T. Harbinson, Taylorsville 
William G. Ijames, Jr., Mocksville 

23 Samuel L. Osborne, Wilkesboro 
Edgar B. Gregory, Wilkesboro 
Michael E. Helms, Wilkesboro 

24 Robert H. Lacey, Newland 
Charles P. Ginn, Boone 

R. Alexander Lyerly, Banner Elk 

25 L. Oliver Noble, Jr., Hickory 
Ronald E. Bogle, Hickory 
Robert E. Hodges, Valdese 
Jonathan L. Jones, Valdese 
Timothy S. Kincaid, Newton 
Nancy L. Einstein, Lenoir 



District 

26 James E. Lanning, Charlotte 
Marilyn R. Bissell, Charlotte 
L. Stanley Brown, Charlotte 
Daphene L. Cantrell, Charlotte 
Richard A. Elkins, Charlotte 
H. Brent McKnight, Charlotte 
Resa L. Harris, Charlotte 
Robert P. Johnston, Charlotte 
William G. Jones, Charlotte 
H. William Constangy, Jr., Charlotte 
William H. Scarborough, Charlotte 
Richard D. Boner, Charlotte 

27A Larry B. Langson, Gastonia 
Daniel J. Walton, Gastonia 
Harley B. Gaston, Jr., Belmont 
Timothy L. Patti, Gastonia 
Catherine C. Stevens, Gastonia 

27B George W. Hamrick, Shelby 

James T. Bowen, III, Lincolnton 
J. Keaton Fonvielle, Shelby 

28 Earl J. Fowler, Jr., Arden 
Gary S. Cash, Fletcher 
Robert L. Harrell, Asheville 
Peter L. Roda, Asheville 

29 Loto J. Greenlee, Marion 
Stephen F. Franks, Hendersonville 
Robert S. Cilley, Brevard 
Thomas N. Hix, Hendersonville 

30 John J. Snow, Jr., Murphy 
Steven J. Bryant, Bryson City 
Danny E. Davis, Waynesville 



*The Chief District Court Judge for each district is listed first. 



35 



DISTRICT COURT JUDGES 



The Association of District Court Judges 

(Officers as of June 30, 1989) 

Frank M. Montgomery, Salisbury, President 

Rodney R. Goodman, Kinston, Vice President 

Oliver Noble, Jr., Hickory, Secretary-Treasurer 

E. Burt Aycock, Jr., Greenville 
W. S. Harris, Jr., Graham 
Jerry Cash Martin, Mount Airy 
Charles P. Ginn, Boone 

Additional Executive Committee Members 




Judge Frank M. Montgomery 



36 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 
The District Courts 



North Carolina's district courts are trial courts with original 
jurisdiction of the overwhelming majority of the cases handled 
by the State's court system. There were 162 district court judges 
serving in 35 district court districts during 1988-89. These 
judges are elected to four-year terms by the voters of their 
respective districts. 

A total of 644 magistrate positions were authorized as of 
June 30, 1989. Of this number, about 70 positions were 
specified as part-time. Magistrates are appointed by the senior 
resident superior court judge from nominations submitted by 
the clerk of superior court of their county, and they are 
supervised by the chief district court judge of their district. 

Jurisdiction 

The jurisdiction of the district court extends to virtually all 
misdemeanor cases, probable cause hearings in felony cases, all 
juvenile proceedings, involuntary commitments and recom- 
mitments to mental hospitals, and domestic relations cases. 
Effective September 1, 1986, the General Assembly decrimi- 
nalized many minor traffic offenses. Such offenses, previously 
charged as misdemeanors, are now "infractions," defined as 
non-criminal violations of law not punishable by imprison- 
ment. The district court division has original jurisdiction for all 
infraction cases. The district courts have concurrent jurisdiction 
with the superior courts in general civil cases, but the district 
courts are the proper courts for the trial of civil cases where the 
amount in controversy is $10,000 or less. Upon the plaintiffs 
request, a civil case in which the amount in controversy is 
$1,500 or less, may be designated a "small claims" case and 
assigned by the chief district court judge to a magistrate for 
hearing. Magistrates are empowered to try worthless check 
criminal cases as directed by the chief district court judge when 
the value of the check does not exceed $1,000. In addition, they 
may accept written appearances, waivers of trial, and pleas of 
guilty in such worthless check cases when the amount of the 
check is $1,000 or less, the offender has made restitution, and 
the offender has fewer than four previous worthless check 
convictions. Magistrates may accept waivers of appearance and 
pleas of guilty in misdemeanor or infraction cases involving 
traffic, alcohol, boating, hunting and fishing violation cases, for 
which a uniform schedule of fines has been adopted by the 
Conference of Chief District Judges. Magistrates also conduct 
initial hearings to fix conditions of release for arrested 
defendants, and they are empowered to issue arrest and search 
warrants. 

Administration 

A chief district court judge is appointed for each district 



court district by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court from 
among the elected judges in the respective districts. Subject to 
the Chief Justice's general supervision, each chief judge 
exercises administrative supervision and authority over the 
operation of the district courts and magistrates in the district. 
Each chief judge is responsible for scheduling sessions of district 
court and assigning judges; supervising the calendaring of 
noncriminal cases; assigning matters to magistrates; making 
arrangements for court reporting and jury trials in civil cases; 
and supervising the discharge of clerical functions in the district 
courts. 

The chief district court judges meet in conference at least 
once a year upon the call of the Chief Justice of the Supreme 
Court. Among other matters, this annual conference adopts a 
uniform schedule of traffic offenses and fines for their violation 
for use by magistrates and clerks of court in accepting 
defendants' waivers of appearance and guilty pleas. 



Expenditures 

Total expenditures for the operation of the district courts in 
1 988-89 amounted to $32, 1 7 1 ,668. This is an increase of 7.5% 
over 1987-88 expenditures of $29,939,853. Included in this 
total are the personnel costs of court reporters and secretaries as 
well as the personnel costs of the 162 district court judges and 
644 magistrates. The 1988-89 total is 18.2% of the General 
Fund expenditures for the operation of the entire Judicial 
Department, about the same percentage share of total Judicial 
Department expenditures for the district courts in the 1987-88 
fiscal year. 



Caseload 

During 1988-89 the statewide total number of district court 
filings (civil and criminal) increased by 199,296 cases (9.9%) 
over the total number reported for 1987-88. Not including 
juvenile proceedings and mental hospital commitment hearings, 
a total of 2,203,743 cases were filed in 1988-89. Much of this 
increase is attributable to increases in criminal motor vehicle 
and infraction filings. Considering criminal motor vehicle and 
infraction cases together there was an increase of 1 1 7,58 1 cases 
(11.4%) above the number of such cases filed in 1987-88. 
Filings of criminal non-motor vehicle cases increased by 
42, 1 80 (8.2%), and filings of civil magistrate cases increased by 
30,693 (11.1%) above the number of cases filed in these 
categories in 1987-88. 



37 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 
The District Courts 



The Conference of Chief District Court Judges 

(Officers as of June 30, 1989) 

Frank M. Montgomery, Salisbury, President 
Nicholas Long, Roanoke Rapids, Secretary-Treasurer 




Judge Frank M. Montgomery 



38 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 



DISTRICT ATTORNEYS 

(As of June 30, 1989) 



Prosecutorial 
District 

1 H. P. WILLIAMS, JR., Elizabeth City 

2 MITCHELL D. NORTON, Washington 
3A THOMAS D. HAIGWOOD, Greenville 
3B WILLIAM D. McFADYEN, New Bern 

4 WILLIAM H. ANDREWS, Jacksonville 

5 JERRY L. SPIVEY, Wilmington 

6 DAVID H. BEARD, JR., Murfreesboro 

7 HOWARD S. BONEY, JR., Tarboro 

8 DONALD JACOBS, Goldsboro 

9 DAVID R. WATERS, Oxford 

10 C. COLON WILLOUGHBY, JR., Raleigh 

1 1 JOHN W. TWISDALE, Smithfield 

12 EDWARD W. GRANNIS, JR., Fayetteville 

13 MICHAEL F. EASLEY, Bolivia 

14 RONALD L. STEPHENS, Durham 
15A STEVE A. BALOG, Graham 

1 5B CARL R. FOX, Chapel Hill 

16A JEAN E. POWELL, Raeford 



Prosecutorial 
District 

16B JOHN R. TOWNSEND, Lumberton 

17A THURMAN B. HAMPTON, Wentworth 

17B HAROLD D. BOWMAN, Dobson 

1 8 HORACE M. KIMEL, JR., Greensboro 

19A JAMES E. ROBERTS, Concord 

19B GARLAND N. YATES, Asheboro 

20 CARROLL LOWDER, Monroe 

21 W. WARREN SPARROW, Winston-Salem 

22 H. W. ZIMMERMAN, JR., Lexington 

23 MICHAEL A. ASHBURN, North Wilkesboro 

24 JAMES THOMAS RUSHER, Boone 

25 ROBERT E. THOMAS, Newton 

26 PETER S. GILCHRIST, Charlotte 
27A CALVIN B. HAMRICK, Gastonia 
27B WILLIAM C. YOUNG, Shelby 

28 ROBERT W. FISHER, Asheville 

29 ALAN C. LEONARD, Rutherfordton 

30 ROY H. PATTON, JR., Waynesville 



39 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 
The District Attorneys 



The Conference of District Attorneys 

(Executive Committee as of June 30, 1989) 

Ronald L. Stephens, President 

H. P. Williams, Jr., President-Elect 

W. David McFadyen, Jr., Vice President 

Michael F. Easley 

Thomas D. Haigwood 

Calvin B. Hamrick 

Horace M. Kimel 

C. Colon Willoughby, Jr., 



The District Attorneys Association 

(Officers as of June 30, 1989) 

Ronald L. Stephens, Durham, President 
H. P. Williams, Jr., Elizabeth City, President-Elect 
W. David McFadyen, Jr., New Bern, Vice President 
Gail Weiss, Durham, Secretary- Treasurer 




District Attorney 
Ronald L. Stephens 



40 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 



The District Attorneys 



The State is divided into 36 prosecutorial districts which, 
with one exception, correspond to the 35 district court districts. 
The counties in District Court District 3 make up two separate 
prosecutorial districts, Prosecutorial Districts 3A and 3B. 
Prosecutorial District 3 A consists of Pitt County, and Prosecu- 
torial District 3B is comprised of Craven, Carteret, and Pamlico 
(G.S. 7A-60). A district attorney is elected by the voters in each 
of the 36 districts for four- year terms. 

Duties 

The district attorney represents the State in all criminal 
actions brought in the superior and district courts in the district, 
and is responsible for ensuring that infraction cases are 
prosecuted efficiently. In addition to prosecutorial functions, 
the district attorney is responsible for calendaring criminal 
cases for trial. 

Resources 

Each district attorney may employ on a full-time basis the 
number of assistant district attorneys authorized by statute for 
the district. As of June 30, 1989, a total of 23 1 assistant district 
attorneys were authorized for the 36 prosecutorial districts. The 
district attorney of District 26 (Mecklenburg County) had the 
largest staff (19 assistants) and the district attorney of five 
districts (15A, 15B, 17B, 23, and 24) had the smallest staff 
(three assistants). 

Each district attorney is authorized to employ an admini- 
strative assistant to aid in preparing cases for trial and to 
expedite the criminal court docket. The district attorney in 1 8 
districts is authorized to employ an investigatorial assistant who 
aids in the investigation of cases prior to trial. All district 
attorneys are authorized to employ at least one victim and 
witness assistant. 

Expenditures 

A total of $20,452,61 1 was expended in 1988-89 for the 36 
offices of district attorney. In addition, a total of $102,550 was 
expended for the District Attorney's Conference and its staff. 

1988-1989 Caseload 

A total of 100,587 criminal cases were filed in the superior 
courts during 1988-89, consisting of 62,752 felony cases and 
37,835 misdemeanor cases; all but 4,658 of the misdemeanors 
were appeals from the district courts. The total number of 
criminal filings in the superior courts in 1987-88 was 88,948. 
The increase of 11,639 cases in 1988-89 represents a 13.1% 
increase over the 1987-88 total. 

A total of 94,625 criminal cases were disposed of in the 
superior courts during 1988-89. There were 58,453 felony 
dispositions, and 36,172 misdemeanor dispositions. In 1988- 
89, total criminal case dispositions increased by 9,502 cases 
(11.2%) over the 85,123 cases disposed of in 1987-88. 

The median ages of criminal cases at disposition in the 



superior courts during 1988-89 were 85 days for felony cases 
and 72 days for misdemeanors. In 1987-88, the median age of 
felony cases at disposition was 86 days, and the median age at 
disposition for misdemeanor cases was 70 days. 

The number of criminal cases disposed of by jury trial in the 
superior courts decreased from 3,111 in 1987-88 to 2,830 in 
1988-89, a decrease of 9.0%. As in past years, the proportion of 
total criminal cases disposed by jury was small, 3.7% in 1987- 
88 compared to 3.0% in 1988-89. However, the relatively small 
number of cases disposed by jury requires a great proportion of 
the superior court time and resources devoted to handling the 
criminal caseload. 

In contrast, in 1988-89 a majority (51,349 or 54.3%) of 
criminal case dispositions in superior courts were processed on 
submission of guilty pleas, not requiring a trial. This percentage 
represents a slight increase from the proportion of guilty plea 
dispositions reported for 1987-88 (53.6%). 

"Dismissal by district attorney" accounted for a significant 
percentage of all criminal case dispositions during 1988-89, a 
total of 26,109 cases, or 27.6% of all dispositions. This 
proportion is comparable to that reported for prior years. Many 
of the dismissals involved the situation of two or more cases 
pending against the same defendant, where the defendant 
pleads guilty to some charges and other charges are dismissed. 

The total number of criminal cases disposed of in the 
superior courts was 5,962 cases less than the total number of 
cases filed in 1988-89. Consequently, the number of criminal 
cases pending in superior court increased from 30,315 at the 
beginning of the fiscal year, to a total pending at year's end of 
36,277, an increase of 19.7%. 

The median age of pending felony cases in the superior 
courts increased from 79 days on June 30, 1988, to 91 days on 
June 30, 1989. The median age of pending misdemeanors 
remained about the same, 78 days on June 30, 1988, compared 
to 79 days on June 30, 1989. 

In the district courts, a total of 1,702,723 criminal cases and 
infractions were filed during 1988-89. This total consisted of 
467,644 criminal motor vehicle cases, 678,189 infraction cases, 
and 556,890 criminal non-motor vehicle cases. A comparison 
of total filings in 1988-89 with total filings in 1987-88 
(1,542,962) reveals an increase in district court criminal and 
infraction filings of 159,761 cases, or 10.4%. Filings of non- 
motor vehicle cases rose by 42, 1 80 cases (8.2%), from 5 1 4,7 1 
cases in 1987-88 to 556,890 cases in 1988-89. Filings of motor 
vehicle plus infraction cases increased by 117,581 cases 
(11.4%), from 1,028,252 in 1987-88 to 1,145,833 in 1988-89. 

Total dispositions of motor vehicle and infraction cases in 
the district courts amounted to 1 , 1 1 2, 1 20 cases during 1 988-89 
(447,517 motor vehicle dispositions and 664,603 infraction 
dispositions). As in prior years, a substantial portion of such 
cases are disposed by waiver of appearance and entry of pleas 
of guilty (or "responsibility" in infraction cases) before a clerk 
or magistrate. During 1988-89, 544,036 (48.9%) of motor 
vehicle and infraction cases were disposed by waiver. This 
substantial number of cases did not, of course, require action by 
the district attorneys' offices and should not be regarded as 



41 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 



having been a part of the district attorneys' caseload. The 
remaining 568.084 infraction and motor vehicle cases (224,966 
infraction and 343.1 18 motor vehicle cases) were disposed by 
means other than waiver. This balance was 80.696 cases (or 
16.6%) more than the 487.388 non-waiver motor vehicle and 
infraction dispositions in 1987-88. 

With respect to non-motor vehicle criminal case disposi- 
tions, a total of 535.502 such cases were disposed of in district 
courts in 1988-89. As with superior court criminal cases, the 
most frequent method of disposition was by entry of guilty plea; 
the next most frequent was dismissal by the district attorney. A 
total of 196.979 cases, or 36.8% of the dispositions were by 
guilty pleas. An additional 146,559 cases, or 27.4% of the total 
were disposed of by prosecutor dismissal. The remaining cases 
were disposed of by waiver (10.4%), trial (7.5%), as a felony 
probable cause matter (9.6%), or by other means (8.4%). 



During 1988-89, the median age at disposition of non-motor 
vehicle criminal cases was 30 days, the same as the median age 
at disposition for these cases in 1987-88. 

During 1988-89, filings of criminal non-motor vehicle cases 
in the district courts exceeded dispositions by 2 1 ,388 cases. The 
number of non-motor vehicle criminal cases pending at year's 
end was 1 1 5,865, compared with a total of 94,477 that were 
pending at the beginning of the year, an increase of 21,388 
(22.6%) in the number of pending cases. The median age for 
pending non-motor vehicle cases was 58 days on June 30, 
1989, compared to 57 days on June 30, 1988. 

Additional information on the criminal caseloads in superior 
and district courts is included in Part IV of this Report. 



42 



CLERKS OF SUPERIOR COURT 



(As of June 30, 1989) 



COUNTY 


CLERK OF COURT 


COUNTY 


CLERK OF COURT 


Alamance 


Louise B. Wilson 


Johnston 


Will R. Crocker 


Alexander 


Seth Chapman 


Jones 


Ronald H. Metts 


Alleghany 


Rebecca J. Gambill 


Lee 


Lucille H. York 


Anson 


R. Frank Hightower 


Lenoir 


Claude C. Davis 


Ashe 


Jerry L. Roten 


Lincoln 


Pamela C. Huskey 


Avery 


Robert F. Taylor 


Macon 


Anna I. Carson 


Beaufort 


Thomas S. Payne, III 


Madison 


James W. Cody 


Bertie 


John Tyler 


Martin 


Phyllis G. Pearson 


Bladen 


Hilda H. Coleman 


McDowell 


Ruth B. Williams 


Brunswick 


Diana R. Morgan 


Mecklenburg 


Robert M. Blackburn 


Buncombe 


J. Ray Elingburg 


Mitchell 


Linda D. Woody 


Burke 


Major A. Joines 


Montgomery 


Charles M. Johnson 


Cabarrus 


Estus B. White 


Moore 


Rachel H. Comer 


Caldwell 


Jeanette Turner 


Nash 


Rachel M. Joyner 


Camden 


Catherine W. McCoy 


New Hanover 


Louise D. Rehder 


Carteret 


Darlene Leonard 


Northampton 


R. Jennings White, Jr. 


Caswell 


Janet H. Cobb 


Onslow 


Everitte Barbee 


Catawba 


Phyllis B. Hicks 


Orange 


Shirley L. James 


Chatham 


Janice Oldham 


Pamlico 


Mary Jo Potter 


Cherokee 


Rose Mary Crooke 


Pasquotank 


Frances W. Thompson 


Chowan 


Marjorie H. Hollowell 


Pender 


Frances D. Basden 


Clay 


James H. McClure 


Perquimans 


Lois G. Godwin 


Cleveland 


Ruth S. Dedmon 


Person 


W. Thomas Humphries 


Columbus 


Lacy R. Thompson 


Pitt 


Sandra Gaskins 


Craven 


Dorothy Pate 


Polk 


Judy P. Arledge 


Cumberland 


George T. Griffin 


Randolph 


Lynda B. Skeen 


Currituck 


Sheila R. Doxey 


Richmond 


Catherine S. Wilson 


Dare 


Betty Mann 


Robeson 


Dixie I. Barrington 


Davidson 


Martha S. Nicholson 


Rockingham 


Frankie C. Williams 


Davie 


Delores C. Jordan 


Rowan 


Edward P. Norvell 


Duplin 


John A. Johnson 


Rutherford 


Keith H. Melton 


Durham 


James Leo Carr 


Sampson 


Charlie T. McCullen 


Edgecombe 


Curtis Weaver 


Scotland 


C. Whitfield Gibson, Jr 


Forsyth 


Frances P. Storey 


Stanly 


David R. Fisher 


Franklin 


Ralph S. Knott 


Stokes 


Pauline Kirkman 


Gaston 


Betty B. Jenkins 


Surry 


David J. Beal 


Gates 


Terry L. Riddick 


Swain 


Sara Robinson 


Graham 


O. W. Hooper, Jr. 


Transylvania 


Marian M. McMahon 


Granville 


Mary Ruth C. Nelms 


Tyrrell 


Nathan T. Everett 


Greene 


Joyce L. Harrell 


Union 


Nola H. McCollum 


Guilford 


Barbara G. Washington 


Vance 


Lucy Longmire 


Halifax 


Ellen C. Neathery 


Wake 


John M. Kennedy 


Harnett 


Georgia Lee Brown 


Warren 


Richard E. Hunter, Jr. 


Haywood 


William G. Henry 


Washington 


Timothy L. Spear 


Henderson 


Thomas H. Thompson 


Watauga 


John T. Bingham 


Hertford 


Sheila Banks 


Wayne 


David B. Brantly 


Hoke 


Juanita Edmund 


Wilkes 


Wayne Roope 


Hyde 


Lenora R. Bright 


Wilson 


Nora H. Hargrove 


Iredell 


Angelia T. Roberts 


Yadkin 


Harold J. Long 


Jackson 


Frank Watson, Jr. 


Yancey 


F. Warren Hughes 



43 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 
The Clerks of Superior Court 



Association of Clerks of Superior Court 

(Officers as of June 30, 1989) 

James L. Carr, Durham County 
President 

Ray Elingburg, Buncombe County 
First Vice President 

Judy Arledge, Polk County 
Second Vice President 

C. Whitfield Gibson, Jr., Scotland County 
Secretary 

Georgia L. Brown, Harnett County 
Treasurer 




James L. Carr 



44 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 



The Clerks of Superior Court 



A Clerk of Superior Court is elected for a four-year term by 
the voters in each of North Carolina's 100 counties. The Clerk 
has jurisdiction to hear and decide special proceedings and is, 
ex officio, judge of probate, in addition to performing record- 
keeping and administrative functions for both the superior and 
district courts of the county. 

Jurisdiction 

The original jurisdiction of the clerk of superior court 
includes the probate of wills and administration of decedents' 
estates. It also includes such "special proceedings" as adoptions, 
condemnations of private property under the public's right of 
eminent domain, proceedings to establish boundaries, fore- 
closures, and certain proceedings to administer the estates of 
minors and incompetent adults. The right of appeal from the 
clerks' judgments in such cases lies to the superior court. 

The clerk of superior court is also empowered to issue search 
warrants and arrest warrants, subpoenas, and other process 
necessary to execute the judgments entered in the superior and 
district courts of the county. For certain offenses, the clerk is 
authorized to accept defendants' waivers of appearance and 
pleas of guilty or admissions of responsibility and to impose 
fines in accordance with a schedule established by the 
Conference of Chief District Court Judges. 

Administration 

The clerk of superior court performs administrative duties 
for both the superior and district courts of the county. Among 
these duties are the maintenance of court records and indexes, 
the control and accounting of funds, and the furnishing of 
information to the Administrative Office of the Courts. 

In most counties, the clerk continues to perform certain 
functions related to preparation of civil case calendars, and in 
many counties, the clerk's staff assists the district attorney in 
preparing criminal case calendars as well. Policy and oversight 



responsibility for civil case calendaring is vested in the State's 
senior resident superior court judges and chief district court 
judges. However, day-to-day civil calendar preparation is the 
clerk's responsibility in all districts except those served by trial 
court administrators. 



Expenditures 

A total of $55,873,693 was expended in 1988-89 for the 
operation of the 100 clerk of superior court offices. In addition 
to the salaries and other expenses of the clerks and their staffs, 
this total includes expenditures for jurors' fees, and witness 
expenses. 

Total expenditures for clerk's offices in 1988-89 amounted 
to 3 1 .6% of the General Fund expenditures for the operations of 
the entire Judicial Department. 

1988-89 Caseload 

During 1988-89, estate case filings totalled 46,992, which 
represents a 4.4% increase over the 45,013 cases filed in 1987- 
88. Estate case dispositions totalled 44,609 cases in 1 988-89, or 
3.1% more than the previous year's total of 43,288. 

A total of 46,405 special proceedings was filed before the 
100 clerks of superior courts in 1988-89. This is an increase of 
4,524 cases (10.8%) from the 41,881 filings in the previous 
fiscal year. Special proceedings dispositions totalled 41,203 
cases, or 8.6% more than the previous year's total of 37,95 1 . 

The clerks of superior court are also responsible for handling 
the records of all case filings and dispositions in the superior and 
district courts. The total number of superior court case filings 
during the 1988-89 year was 1 18,188 and the total number of 
district court filings, not including juvenile proceedings and 
mental hospital commitment hearings, was 2,203,743. 

More detailed information on the estates and special 
proceedings caseloads is included in Part IV of this Report. 



45 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 
Juvenile Services Division 



The Juvenile Services Division of the Administrative Office 
of the Courts provides intake, probation and aftercare services 
to juveniles who are before the District Courts for delinquent 
matters, i.e., violations of the criminal code, including motor 
vehicle violations: and for undisciplined matters, such as 
running away from home, being truant, and being beyond the 
parents' disciplinary control. 

Intake is the screening of complaints alleging delinquent or 
undisciplined behavior by children, to determine whether 
petitions should be filed. During the 1988-89 year a total of 
30.985 complaints were brought to the attention of intake 
counselors. Of this number, 21,650 (70%) were approved for 
filing, and 9,335 (30%) were not approved for filing. 

Probation and aftercare refer to supervision of children in 
their own communities. Probation is authorized by judicial 
order. Aftercare service is provided for juveniles after their 
release from a training school. (Protective supervision is also a 
form of court-ordered supervision within the community; this 
service is combined with probation and aftercare.) 

In 1 988-89 a total of 1 5,739 juveniles were supervised in the 
probation and aftercare program. 



Expenditures 

The Juvenile Services Division is State-funded. The expen- 
ditures for fiscal year 1988-89 totalled $12,070,842. This was 
an increase of 6.5% over the 1987-88 expenditures. The 1988- 
89 expenditures amounted to 6.8% of all General Fund 
expenditures for the operation of the entire Judicial Depart- 
ment, the same percentage share of total Judicial Department 
expenditures for the Division as in the previous fiscal year. 



Administration 

The Administrator of the Juvenile Services Division is 
appointed by the Director of the Administrative Office of the 
Courts. A chief court counselor is appointed for each judicial 
district by the Administrator of the Juvenile Services Division, 
with the approval of the Chief District Court Judge and the 
Administrative Officer of the Courts. Subject to the Admini- 
strator's general supervision, each chief court counselor exercises 
administrative supervision over the operation of the court 
counseling services in the respective districts. 



Juvenile Services Division Staff 
(As of June 30, 1989) 

Thomas A. Danek, Administrator 

Nancy C. Patteson, Area Administrator 

Edward F. Taylor, Area Administrator 

John T. Wilson, Area Administrator 

Rex B. Yates, Area Administrator 

M. Harold Rogerson, Jr., Program Specialist 

Arlene J. Kincaid, Administrative Officer 



46 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 

Juvenile Services Division 
(As of June 30, 1989) 



District Court 

District Chief Court Counselors 



District Court 

District Chief Court Counselors 



1 


Donald Alexander 


2 


Joseph A. Paul 


3 


Eve C. Rogers 


4 


Ida Ray Miles 


5 


Phyllis Roebuck 


6 


John R. Brady 


7 


Pam Honeycutt 


8 


Lynn C. Sasser 


9 


Sherman Wilson 


10 


Larry C. Dix 


11 


Henry C. Cox 


12 


Phil T. Utley 


13 


Jimmy E. Godwin 


14 


Fred Elkins 


15A 


Harry L. Derr 


15B 


Donald Hargrove 


16A 


Alfred Bridges 



16B 


Robert H. Hughes 


17Aand 17B 


Martha M. Lauten 


18 


J. Manley Dodson 


19A and 19B 


James C. Queen 


20 


Jimmy L. Craig 


21 


James J. Weakland 


22 


Carl T. Duncan 


23 


C. Wayne Dixon 


24 


Lynn Hughes 


25 


Lee Cox 


26 


James A. Yancey 


27A 


Charles Reeves 


27B 


Gloria Newman 


28 


Louis Parrish 


29 


Kenneth E. Lanning 


30 


Betty G. Alley 



THE COURT COUNSELORS ASSOCIATION 

(Officers for 1988-89) 

Executive Committee Members 

Carl Duncan, President 
Shirley Hudler, President-Elect 
Gina Crawford, Secretary 
Dennis Cotten, Treasurer 
Amie Haith, Parliamentarian 



1986-89 

Richard Alligood 
Marion Brewer 
Anne Loy 



Board Members 

1987-90 1988-91 



Gloria Newman 
Blake Belcher 
Charles Reeves 



Kathy Dudley 
Martha Lauten 
Wayne Arnold 




Carl Duncan 



47 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 
Office of Guardian Ad Litem Services 



Program Services 

When a petition alleging abuse or neglect of a juvenile is filed 
in district court, the judge appoints a trained volunteer guardian 
ad litem and an attorney advocate to work together to represent 
the child's best interests. The attorney protects the child's legal 
rights while ensuring that the volunteer guardian has appro- 
priate access to the court process. The trained volunteer 
investigates the child's situation and works with the attorney to 
report the child's needs to the court and to make recommen- 
dations for case disposition and any necessary continuing 
supervision until court intervention is no longer required. 
During 1988-89. a total of 1,252 volunteers were active in the 
North Carolina program and represented a total of 6,519 
abused and neglected children. These volunteers participated in 
7.212 court hearings and gave approximately 1 25,000 volunteer 
hours to casework and training in the State's guardian ad litem 
program. 

Expenditures 

During 1 988-89, total expenditures for the guardian ad litem 
program amounted to $1,688,951. Of this amount, $576,718 
was for program attorney fees and $1,11 2,233 was for program 
administration. The total included reimbursement of volunteers' 
expense of $74,001 (covering 107,512 casework hours for 
6.519 abused and neglected children). This compares with 
1987-88 total expenditures of $1,332,851, with 989 volunteers 
representing 5,011 children and providing 64,752 casework 
hours with reimbursement expenses of $41,158. 

Administration 

The Office of Guardian Ad Litem Services, established by 
the General Assembly in 1983, is a division of the Administra- 
tive Office of the Courts. The Director of the Administrative 



Office of the Courts appoints the Administrator of the Office of 
Guardian Ad Litem Services and appoints members of a 
Guardian Ad Litem Advisory Committee to work with the 
Administrator, who is responsible for planning and directing 
the guardian ad litem services program throughout the State. 

The Administrator is assisted by two regional managers, 
each of whom supervises the development and implementation 
of services for a group of districts, directing the local program, 
providing assistance in training programs for volunteers, and 
resolving operational problems in the districts. 

A coordinator is employed for 30 of the State's 35 district 
court districts to recruit, screen, train and supervise volunteers. 
Program coordinators contact community groups, local agencies, 
the courts, and the media in order to develop volunteer 
participation, solicit support from key officials, provide public 
education about the program, and cultivate services for 
children. The coordinators plan an initial sixteen-hour training 
course for new volunteers, match children (who are before the 
courts) with volunteers, implement continued training for 
experienced guardians, and provide supervision of, and consul- 
tation and support to, volunteers. Other coordinator respon- 
sibilities are to ensure that in each case the attorney receives 
information from the volunteer assigned to the case and that the 
court receives timely oral or written reports each time a child's 
case is heard. (Coordinators were not employed during 1988- 
89 for districts in which the caseload was too small to justify a 
coordinator position. In those districts, a contract attorney 
served as the volunteer coordinator.) 

Guardian Ad Litem Staff 
(As of June 30, 1989) 

Virginia C. Weisz, Administrator 

Cindy Mays, Regional Manager 

Marilyn Stevens, Regional Manager 



4X 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 

Guardian ad Litem Divison 
(As of June 30, 1989) 



istrict Court 




District 


Coordinator 


1 


Veola Spivey 


2 


Jennifer Leggett 


3 


Carol Mattocks 


4 


Jean Hawley 


5 


Jane Brister 


6 


Patsey Moseley-Moss 


7 


Sandra Pittman 


8 


Claudia Kadis 


9 


Sarah Sponenberg 


10 


Lloyd Inman 


12 


Brownie Smathers 


13 


Michele Rohde and 




Betty Buck 


14 


Cy Gurney 



District Court 




District 


Coordinator 


15A 


Eleanor Ketcham 


15B&19B 


Floyd Wicker 


16A & 16B 


Gladys Pierce 


18 


Sam Parrish 


19A 


Amy Collins 


20 


Martha Sue Hall 


21 


Linda Garrou 


22 


Pam Ashmore 


25 


Anglea Phillips 


26 


Judi Strause 


27A & 27B 


Sindy Waggoner 


28 


Jean Moore 


29 


Barbara King 


30 


Celia Larson 



49 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 
Public Defenders 



During 1988-89. there were ten public defender offices in 
North Carolina, serving Defender Districts 3 A, 3B, 12, 15B, 
1 6A. 1 6B. 1 8. 26. 27A. and 28.* Public defenders in all districts 
except 16B are appointed by the senior resident superior court 
judge of the superior court district or set of districts which 
includes the county or counties of the defender district; 
appointments are made from a list of not less than two and not 
more than three nominees submitted by written ballot of the 
licensed attorneys resident in the defender district.** Their 
terms are four years. Public defenders are entitled by statute to 
the numbers of full or part-time assistants and investigators as 
may be authorized by the Administrative Office of the Courts. 

Entitlement of Indigents to Counsel 

A person is "indigent" if "financially unable to secure legal 
representation." An indigent person is entitled to State-paid 
legal representation in the proceedings listed in G.S. 7A-451, 
including any case in which imprisonment or a fine of $500 or 
more is likely to be adjudged; juvenile proceedings which may 
result in confinement, transfer to superior court for trial on a 
felony charge, or termination of parental rights; proceedings 
alleging mental illness or incapacity which may result in 
hospitalization or sterilization; extradition proceedings; certain 
probation or parole revocation hearings; and certain requests 
for post-conviction relief from a criminal judgment. 

In defender districts, most representation of indigents is 
handled by the public defender's office. However, in certain 
circumstances, such as a potential conflict of interest, the court 
or the public defender may assign private counsel to represent 
an indigent. In areas of the state that are not served by a public 
defender office, indigents are represented by private counsel 
assigned by the court. 

Expenditures 

A total of $4,71 7,45 1 was expended for operation of the ten 
public defender offices during 1988-89. This was an increase of 
$630,199 (15.4%) over 1987-88 expenditures of $4,087,252. 

1988-89 Caseload 

The ten public defender offices disposed of cases involving a 



total of 28,363 defendants during 1988-89. This was an 
increase of 3,407 defendants, or 13.7%, over the 24,956 
defendants represented to disposition during 1987-88. 

Additional information concerning the operation of these 
offices is found in Part III of this Annual Report. 



PUBLIC DEFENDERS 

(As of June 30, 1989) 

♦District 3A (Pitt County) 

Robert L. Shoffner, Greenville 

♦District 3B (Carteret County) 
Henry C. Boshamer, Beaufort 

District 12 (Cumberland County) 
Mary Ann Tally, Fayetteville 

District 15B (Orange and Chatham Counties) 
John Kirk Osborn, Chapel Hill 

♦District 16A (Scotland and Hoke Counties) 
J. Graham King, Laurinburg 

♦District 16B (Robeson County) 

Angus B. Thompson, II, Lumberton 

District 18 (Guilford County) 

Wallace C. Harrelson, Greensboro 

District 26 (Mecklenburg County) 
Isabel S. Day, Charlotte 

District 27A (Gaston County) 

Rowell C. Cloninger, Jr., Gastonia 

District 28 (Buncombe County) 
J. Robert Hufstader, Asheville 



•Through December 31, 1988, Pitt and Carteret Counties were served by a single public defender office, within judicial district 3. Effective January 1, 1989, the 
General Assembly established Defender Districts3A (Pitt) and 3B (Carteret). Defender Districts 16Aand 16B were established effective January 1, 1989. Prior to 
January 1, 1989. Hoke County was served by the public defender office in district 12. 

"The public defender in District 16B is appointed from a list of not less than three names submitted by written ballot of the licensed attorneys who reside in the 
district, by the resident superior court judge of Superior Court District 16B other than the senior resident superior court judge. 



50 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 
Public Defenders 



The Association of Public Defenders 

(Officers as of June 30, 1989) 

Wallace C. Harrelson, President 

Kellum Morris, Vice President 

Elloise McCain Hassell, Secretary-Treasurer 




Wallace C. Harrelson 



51 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 

The Office of the Appellate Defender 

(Staff as of June 30, 1989) 



Malcolm Ray Hunter, Jr., Appellate Defender 



Assistant Appellate Defenders 

M. Patricia DeVine 
David W. Dorey 
Staples S. Hughes 
Teresa McHugh 



Mark D. Montgomery 
Daniel R. Pollitt 
M. Gordon Widenhouse 
Constance H. Everhart 



The Appellate Defender Office began operation as a State- 
funded program on October 1, 1981. (Prior to that date, 
appellate defender services were funded by a one-year federal 
grant.) The 1985 General Assembly made permanent the 
Appellate Defender Office by repealing its expiration provision. 
In accord with the assignments made by trial court judges, it is 
the responsibility of the Appellate Defender and staff to 
provide criminal defense appellate services to indigent persons 
who are appealing their convictions to the N.C. Supreme 
Court, the N.C. Court of Appeals, or to Federal courts. 

The Office of the Appellate Defender, through a combination 
of state and federal funding, also provides assistance to 
attorneys representing defendants in capital cases, and acts as 
counsel for defendants in other capital trials and post- 
conviction proceedings. 

The Appellate Defender is appointed by and carries out the 



duties of the Office under the general supervision of the Chief 
Justice. The Chief Justice may, consistent with the resources 
available to the Appellate Defender and to insure quality 
criminal defense services, authorize certain appeals to be 
assigned to a local public defender office or to private assigned 
counsel instead of to the Appellate Defender. 



1988-89 Caseload 

The Office of the Appellate Defender accepted appointment 
in a total of 139 appeals or petitions for writ of certiorari during 
the 1988-89 year. The Appellate Defender Office filed a total 
of 1 15 briefs in the North Carolina Court of Appeals and 41 
briefs in the Supreme Court of North Carolina during the 
1988-89 year. 




Malcolm Ray Hunter, Jr. 



52 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 

The North Carolina Courts Commission 

(Members as of June 30, 1989) 



Appointed by the Governor 

Johnathan L. Rhyne, Jr., Lincolnton, Chairman 
Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

Clyde M. Roberts, Marshall 

Garland N. Yates, Asheboro 
District Attorney 

Harold J. Long, Yadkinville 
Clerk of Court 

Dan R. Simpson, Morganton 
Member, N.C. State Senate 

Appointed by President of the Senate 
(Lieutenant Governor) 

Anthony E. Rand, Fayetteville 
Member, N.C. Senate 

Russell J. Hollers, Troy 

Henson P. Barnes, Goldsboro 
Member, N.C. Senate 

Alfred M. Goodwin, Louisburg 

R. C. Soles, Jr., Tabor City 
Member, N.C. Senate 

Lillian O. Briant, Asheboro 

Ex-Officio (Non- Voting) 

O. William Faison, Raleigh 

N.C. Bar Association Representative 

Z. Creighton Brinson, Tarboro 
N.C. State Bar Representative 

Franklin E. Freeman, Jr., Raleigh 
Administrative Officer of the Courts 



Appointed by the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives 

Daniel T. Blue, Jr., Raleigh 

Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

Robert C. Hunter, Marion 

Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

Ralph S. Knott, Louisburg 
Clerk of Court 

Roy A. Cooper, HI, Rocky Mount 

Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

Robert C. Hunter, Marion 

Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

Dennis A. Wicker, Sanford 

Member, N.C. House of Representatives 

Appointed by the Chief Justice of the 
N.C. Supreme Court 

Burley B. Mitchell, Jr., Raleigh 

Associate Justice, N.C. Supreme Court 

Clifton E. Johnson, Charlotte 
Judge, N.C. Court of Appeals 

J. Milton Reed, Jr., Durham 
Superior Court Judge 

Forrest A. Ferrell, Hickory 
Superior Court Judge 

Nicholas Long, Roanoke Rapids 
District Court Judge 

Samuel McD. Tate, Morganton 
District Court Judge 



53 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 
The North Carolina Courts Commission 



The North Carolina Courts Commission was reestablished 
b> the 1979 General Assembly "to make continuing studies of 
the structure, organization, jurisdiction, procedures and person- 
nel of the Judicial Department and of the General Court of 
Justice and to make recommendations to the General Assembly 
for such changes therein as will facilitate the administration of 
justice." Initially, the Commission consisted of 15 voting 
members, with five each appointed by the Governor, the 
President of the Senate (Lieutenant Governor), and the 
Speaker of the House. The Commission also had three ex 
officio members. 

The 1 98 1 General Assembly amended the statutes pertaining 
to the Courts Commission, to increase the number of voting 
members from 15 to 23, with the Governor to appoint seven 
voting members, the President of the Senate to appoint eight 
voting members, and the Speaker of the House to appoint eight 
voting members. The non- voting ex officio members remained 
the same: a representative of the North Carolina Bar Associa- 
tion, a representative of the North Carolina State Bar, and the 
Administrative Officer of the Courts. 

The 1983 Session of the General Assembly further amended 
G.S. 7A-506, to revise the voting membership of the Commis- 
sion. Effective July 1, 1983, the Commission consists of 24 
voting members, six to be appointed by the Governor; six to be 
appointed by the Speaker of the House; six to be appointed by 
the President of the Senate; and six to be appointed by the Chief 
Justice of the North Carolina Supreme Court. The Governor 
continues to appoint the Chairman of the Commission, from 
among its legislative members. The non-voting ex officio 
membership of three persons remains the same. 



Of the six appointees of the Chief Justice, one is to be a 
Justice of the Supreme Court, one is to be a Judge of the Court 
of Appeals, two are to be judges of superior court, and two are 
to be judges of district court. 

Of the six appointees of the Governor, one is to be a district 
attorney, one a practicing attorney, one a clerk of superior 
court, and three are to be members or former members of the 
General Assembly and at least one of these shall not be an 
attorney. 

Of the six appointees of the Speaker of the House, at least 
three are to be practicing attorneys, and three are to be 
members or former members of the General Assembly, and at 
least one of these three is not to be an attorney. 

Of the six appointees of the President of the Senate, at least 
three are to be practicing attorneys, three are to be members or 
former members of the General Assembly, and at least one is to 
be a magistrate. 

During the 1988-89 year, the Courts Commission met twice: 
on October 7, 1988 in Lumberton, and on December 2, 1988, 
in Raleigh. Topics considered during the year included 
suggestions and recommendations presented to the Commission 
at the Lumberton meeting, relating to minorities and their 
treatment by the criminal justice system; calendaring proce- 
dures; public education and magistrate training; domestic 
violence and child abuse law enforcement; increased staffing 
needs for district attorneys; pretrial release procedures; jail 
overcrowding; and indigency screening. The Commission also 
considered the possibility of using FAX technology for service 
of civil papers under the Rules of Civil Procedure. 



54 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 

The Judicial Standards Commission 

(Members as of June 30, 1989) 



Appointed by the Chief Justice 

Court of Appeals Judge Gerald Arnold, 
Fuquay-Varina, Chairman 

Superior Court Judge James M. Long, 
Pilot Mountain 

District Court Judge W. S. Harris, Jr., Graham 



Elected by the Council of the N.C. State Bar 

Rivers D. Johnson, Jr., Warsaw, Vice Chairman 
Louis J. Fisher, Jr., High Point 



Appointed by the Governor 

Pamela S. Gaither, Charlotte, Secretary 
Albert E. Partridge, Jr., Concord 



Deborah R. Carrington, Executive Secretary 




Judge Gerald Arnold 



55 



ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS IN 1988-89 

THE JUDICIAL STANDARDS COMMISSION 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



The Judicial Standards Commission was established by the 
General Assembly pursuant to a constitutional amendment 
approved by the voters at the general election in November 
1972. 

Upon recommendation of the Commission, the Supreme 
Court may censure or remove any judge for willful misconduct 
in office, willful and persistent failure to perform his or her 
duties, habitual intemperance, conviction of a crime involving 
moral turpitude, or conduct prejudicial to the administration of 
justice that brings the judicial office into disrepute. In addition, 
upon recommendation of the Commission, the Supreme Court 
may remove any judge for mental or physical incapacity 
interfering with the performance of duties, which is, or is likely 
to become, permanent. 

Where a recommendation for censure or removal involves a 
justice of the Supreme Court, the recommendation and 
supporting record is filed with the Court of Appeals which has 
and proceeds under the same authority for censure or removal 
of a judge. Such a proceeding would be heard by the Chief 
Judge of the Court of Appeals and the six judges senior in 
service, excluding the Court of Appeals judge who by law 
serves as the Chairman of the Judicial Standards Commission. 

In addition to a recommendation of censure or removal, the 
Commission also utilizes a disciplinary measure known as a 
reprimand. The reprimand is a mechanism administratively 
developed for dealing with inquiries where the conduct does 
not warrant censure or removal, but where some action is 
justified. Since the establishment of the Judicial Standards 
Commission in 1973, reprimands have been issued in sixteen 
instances covering 22 inquiries. 

During the July 1, 1988 - June 30, 1989 fiscal year, the 



Judicial Standards Commission met on October 28, January 
27, April 7, and June 2. 

A complaint or other information against a judge, whether 
filed with the Commission or initiated by the Commission on 
its own motion, is designated as an "Inquiry Concerning a 
Judge." Fifteen such inquiries were pending as of July 1, 1988, 
and 92 inquiries were filed during the fiscal year, giving the 
Commission a total workload of 107 inquiries. 

During the fiscal year, the Commission disposed of 98 
inquiries, and 9 inquiries remained pending at the end of the 
fiscal year. 

The determinations of the Commission regarding the 98 

inquiries disposed of during the fiscal year were as follows: 

(1) 87 inquiries were determined to involve evidentiary 

rulings, length of sentences, or other matters not within 

the Commission's jurisdiction, rather man questions of 

judicial misconduct; 

1 inquiry was determined to involve allegations of 
conduct which did not rise to such a level as would 
warrant investigation by the Commission; 
8 inquiries were determined to warrant no further action 
following completion of preliminary investigations; 
1 inquiry resulted in a private reprimand; and 
1 inquiry resulted in a recommendation of censure. 
Of the 9 inquiries pending at the end of the fiscal year: 

(1) 4 inquiries were awaiting initial review by the Commis- 
sion; and 

(2) 5 inquiries were awaiting completion of a preliminary 
investigation or were subject to other action by the 
Commission. 



(2) 



(3) 

(4) 
(5) 



56 



PART III 



COURT RESOURCES 

• Financial 

• Personnel 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 



Under the State Constitution, the operating expenses of the 
Judicial Department (all North Carolina courts), "other than 
compensation to process servers and other locally paid non- 
judicial officers," are required to be paid from State funds. It is 
customary legislative practice for the General Assembly to 
include appropriations for the operating expenses of all three 
branches of State government in a single budget bill, for a 
two-year period ending on June 30 of the odd-numbered years. 
The budget for the second year of the biennium is generally 
modified during the even-year legislative session. 

Building facilities for the appellate courts are provided by 
State funds, but, by statute, the county governments are 
required to provide from county funds for adequate facilities 
for the trial courts within each of the 100 counties. 



Appropriations from the State's General Fund for operating 
expenses for all departments and agencies of State government, 
including the Judicial Department, totalled $6,226,556,573 for 
the 1988-89 fiscal year. (Appropriations from the Highway 
Fund and appropriations from the General Fund for capital 
improvements and debt servicing are not included in this total.) 

The appropriation from the General Fund for the operating 
expenses of the Judicial Department for 1988-89 was 
$175,864,518. (This included $621,835 for accrued attorney 
fees for indigent defendants paid in July 1989.) As illustrated in 
the chart below, this General Fund appropriation for the 
Judicial Department comprised 2.8% of the General Fund 
appropriations for the operating expenses of all State agencies 
and departments. 



TOTAL GENERAL FUND 
APPROPRIATIONS FOR 
OPERATING EXPENSES 

$6,226,556,573 




JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT 
APPROPRIATION 

$175,864,518 

2.8% 




59 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 



Appropriations from the State's General Fund for operating 
expenses of the Judicial Department over the past seven fiscal 
\ ears are shown in the table below and in the graph at the top of 
the following page. For comparative purposes, appropriations 



from the General Fund for operating expenses of all State 
agencies and departments (including the Judicial Department) 
for the last seven fiscal years are also shown in the table below 
and in the second graph on the following page. 



APPROPRIATIONS FROM GENERAL FUND FOR OPERATING EXPENSES 



Judicial Department 



All State Agencies 



Fiscal Year 

1982-1983 
1983-1984 
1984-1985 
1985-1986 
1986-1987 
1987-1988 
1988-1989 





% Increase over 




% Increase over 


Appropriation 


previous year 


Appropriation 


previous year 


93,927,824 


4.79 


3,477,547,375 


4.50 


106,182,188 


13.05 


3,686,800,772 


6.02 


121,035,791 


13.99 


4,237,230,681 


14.93 


134,145,813 


10.83 


4,780,073,721 


12.81 


146,394,689 


9.13 


5,153,322,580 


7.81 


161,128,433 


10.06 


5,715,172,032 


10.90 


175,864,518 


9.14 


6,226,556,573 


8.95 



AVERAGE ANNUAL 
INCREASE, 1983-1989 



10.14% 



9.42% 



60 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

General Fund Appropriations for Operating Expenses 
Of the Judicial Department, 1982-83 — 1988-89 



$180,000. 

170,000. 

160,000. 

150,000. 

140,000 

130,000 

120,000 

110,000 

100,000 

90,000 

80,000 

70,000 

60,000 

50,000 

40,000 

30,000 

20,000 

10,000 




1982-83 



1983-84 



1984-85 



1985-86 



1986-87 



1987-88 



1988-89 



General Fund Appropriations for Operating Expenses 
Of All State Agencies and Departments, 1982-83 — 1988-89 



$6,500,000 
6,000,000 
5,500,000 
5,000,000 
4,500,000 
4,000,000 
3,500,000. 
3,000,000. 
2,500,000. 
2,000,000. 
1,500,000. 
1,000,000. 
500,000. 



$6,226,556,573 




1982-83 



1983-84 



1984-85 



1985-86 



1986-87 



1987-88 



1988-89 



61 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 
Expenditures July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 

General Fund expenditures for operating expenses of the $176,623,214, divided among the major budget classifications 

Judicial Department during the 1988-89 fiscal year totalled as shown below. 





%of 


Amount 


Total 


2,650,035 


1.50 


3,352,986 


1.90 


16,928,560 


9.59 


32,171,668 


18.21 


55,873,693 


31.64 


12,070,842 


6.83 


23,425,301 


13.26 



Supreme Court 

Court of Appeals 

Superior Courts 

District Courts 

Clerks of Superior Court 

Juvenile Probation and Aftercare 

Representation for Indigents 

Assigned private counsel $14,865,173 

Guardian ad litem for juveniles $102,770 

Guardian ad litem — volunteer and contract program $1,688,951 

Public defenders $4,717,451 

Special counsel at mental hospitals $264,601 

Support services (expert witness fees, professional examinations, transcripts) $629,266 

Appellate Defender Services $575,534 

Indigency Screening $339,316 

N.C. Death Penalty Resource Center $205,503 

Permanent Families Task Force $12,217 

Reasonable Efforts Program $24,519 
District Attorney Offices 20,736,601 11.74 

Office-District Attorney $20,452,611 

District Attorneys' Conference $102,550 

Sexual Abuse Prosecution $45,441 

Victim Assistance $637 

Narcotics Prosecution Program $119,679 

Prosecution Improvement in Motor Vehicle Offenses $15,683 
Administrative Office of the Courts 8,790,102 4.98 

General Administration $4,302,678 

Information Services $4,058,082 

Warehouse & Printing $429,342 
Judicial Standards Commission 72,546 .04 

Dispute Resolution Programs 550,880 .31 

Custody Mediation $133,693 

Dispute Settlement Center $300,405 

Arbitration Program $1 16,782 

TOTAL $176,623,214 100.0 



62 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 
Expenditures, July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



DISTRICT COURTS 

18.21% 



ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 
OF THE COURTS 

4.98% 



REPRESENTATION FOR 
INDIGENTS 13.26% 



JUDICIAL STANDARDS 
COMMISSION 0.04% 
JUVENILE 
SERVICES 6.83% 

DISPUTE RESOLUTION 
PROGRAMS 0.31% 




DISTRICT ATTORNEY PROGRAMS 

11.74% 



SUPERIOR COURTS 

9.59% 



SUPREME COURT 1.50% 
COURT OF APPEALS 1.90% 



CLERKS OF SUPERIOR COURT 31.64% 



As the above chart illustrates, most (71.18%) of Judicial 
Department expenditures goes for operation of the State's trial 
courts: operation of superior courts took 9.59% of total 
expenditures; operation of the district courts (including magis- 
trates, judges and court reporters) took 18.21% of the total; the 



clerks' offices, 31.64% of the total; and district attorneys' 
programs, 11.74% of total Judicial Department expenditures. 
The total General Fund expenditures of $176,623,214 for 
1988-89 represents a 6.63% increase over expenditures of 
$165,637,346 in 1987-88. 



General Fund Expenditures For The Judicial Department 
Fiscal year 1982-83 — 1988-89 



$180,000,000 

170,000,000 

160,000,000 

150,000,000 

140,000,000 

130,000,000 

120,000,000 

110,000,000 

100,000,000 _ $94207215 

90,000,000 
80,000,000 
70,000,000 
60,000,000 
50,000,000 
40,000,000 
30,000,000 
20,000,000 
10,000,000 


1982-83 



$165,637,346 



$122,061,777 




1983-84 



1984-85 



1985-86 



1986-87 



1987-88 



1988-89 






63 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 



Department Receipts 
July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



Receipts for the Judicial Department in the 1988-89 fiscal 
vear totalled $106,278,440. The several sources of these 
receipts are shown in the table below. As in the previous years, 



the major source of receipts were General Court of Justice Fees 
paid by litigants in superior and district court. 



Source of Receipts Amount 

Supreme Court Fees $ 7,731 

Court of Appeals Fees 31,217 

Miscellaneous 141,233 

Grants 146,998 

Sales of Appellate Division Reports 231,304 

1987-88 Equipment Obligation Carryover 326,883 

Department of Crime Control 521,710 

Jail Fees 739,305 

Interest on Checking Account 999,485 

Ten-Day License Revocation Fees 1,100,243 

Indigent Representation Judgments 2,647,192 

Officer Fees 5,573,104 

Federal-Child Support Enforcement 6,307,421 

LEOBFees 7,913,355 

Judicial Facilities Fees 8,174,877 

Fines and Forfeitures 29,798,963 

General Court of Justice Fees 41,617,419 

Total $106,278,440 



%of 
Total 

.01 

.03 

.13 

.14 

.22 

.31 

.49 

.69 

.94 

1.04 

2.49 

5.25 

5.94 

7.44 

7.68 

28.04 

39.16 

100.00% 



This total of $ 1 06,278,440 is an increase of 8.2% over total restated to reflect all Judicial Department receipts. 

1987-88 receipts of $98,217,285. The graph below has been 



Judicial Department Receipts, 1982-83 — 1988-89 



S 1 1 0.000.000 

1 00.000.000 

90.000.000 

80,000,000 

70,000,000 



60,000,000 _ 



50.000.000 
40,000,000 
30.000.000 
20 000 000 
] 0,000,000 




$106,278,440 



$98,217,285. 




1987-88 



1988-89 



64 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Distribution of Judicial Department Receipts 
(July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989) 



As required by the State Constitution, fines, penalties and 
forfeitures collected by the courts in criminal cases are 
distributed to the respective counties in which the cases are 
tried. These funds must be used by the counties for the support 
of the public schools. 

A uniform schedule of court costs for civil and criminal 
cases, comprising a variety of fees, is set by statute for cases filed 
in the superior and district courts. Statutes prescribe the 
distribution of these fees and provide that certain fees shall be 
devoted to specific uses. For example, a facilities fee is included 
in court costs when costs are assessed, and this fee is paid over to 
the respective county or municipality which provided the 
facility used in the case. These fees must be utilized by the 
counties and municipalities to provide and maintain court- 
rooms and related judicial facilities. 

Officer fees (for arrest or service of process) are included, 
where applicable, in the cost of each case filed in the trial courts. 
If a municipal officer performed these services in a case, the fee 
is paid over to the respective municipality. Otherwise, all 
officer fees are paid to the respective counties in which the cases 
are filed. 

A jail fee is included in the costs of each case where 
applicable; these fees are distributed to the respective county or 
municipality whose facilities were used. Most jail facilities in 
the State are provided by the counties. 



Remitted to State Treasurer 

Supreme Court Fees 

Court of Appeals Fees 

Sales of Appellate Division Reports 

LEOB Fees 

General Court of Justice Fees 

Federal-Child Support Enforcement 

Total to State Treasurer 

Distributed to Counties 

Fines and Forfeitures 

Judicial Facilities Fees 

Officer Fees 

Jail Fees 

Ten-Day License Revocation Fees 

Total to Counties 

Distributed to Counties and Beneficiaries 

Interest on Checking Accounts 
Distributed to Municipalities 
Judicial Facilities Fees 
Officer Fees 
Jail Fees 
Total to Municipalities 

Operating Receipts 

Collection on Indigent Representation Judgments 

1987-88 Equipment Obligation Carryover 

Department of Crime Control 

Grants 

Miscellaneous 

Total Retained for Operations 

GRAND TOTAL 



A fee for the Law Enforcement Officers' Benefit and 
Retirement Fund is included as a part of court costs when costs 
are assessed in a criminal case. As required by statute, the 
Judicial Department remits these fees to the State Treasurer, 
for deposit in the Law Enforcement Officers' Benefit and 
Retirement Fund. 

Except as indicated, all superior and district court costs 
collected by the Judicial Department are paid into the State's 
General Fund, as are appellate court fees and proceeds from the 
sales of appellate division reports. 

When private counsel or a public defender is assigned to 
represent an indigent defendant in a criminal case, the trial 
judge sets the money value for the services rendered. If the 
defendant is convicted, a judgment lien is entered against 
him/her for such amount. Collections on these judgments are 
paid into and retained by the department to defray the costs of 
legal representation of indigents. 

Proceeds from the ten-day driver license revocation fee, 
which driving-while-impaired offenders must pay to recover 
their driver licenses, are distributed to the counties. 

Since fiscal year 1987-88, the Federal Government has been 
funding a portion of child support enforcement costs. 





%of 


Amount 


Total 


7,731 


.01 


31,217 


.03 


231,304 


.22 


7,913,355 


7.44 


41,617,419 


39.16 


6,307,421 


5.94 


56,108,447 


52.80 


29,798,963 


28.04 


7,799,448 


7.33 


3,494,799 


3.29 


735,566 


.69 


1,100,243 


1.04 


42,929,019 


40.39 



999,485 



.94 



375,429 


.35 


2,078,305 


1.96 


3,739 


— 


2,457,473 


2.31 


2,647,192 


2.49 


326,883 


.31 


521,710 


.49 


146,998 


.14 


141,233 


.13 


3,784,016 


3.56 


$106,278,440 


100.00 



65 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Amounts of Fees, Fines and Forfeitures Collected by the Courts and 

Distributed to Counties and Municipalities* 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



Distributed to Counties 



Distributed to Municipalities 





Facility 


Officer 


Jail 


Fines and 


Facility 


Officer 


Jail 




County 


Fees 


Fees 


Fees 


Forfeitures 


Fees 


Fees 


Fees 


Total 


Alamance 


135.455 


69.022 


27,233 


523,080 


-0- 


29,601 


-0- 


784,391 


Alexander 


21.254 


10.220 


4,735 


90,539 


-0- 


988 


-0- 


127,735 


Alleghany 


9.131 


5,612 


3,356 


58,388 


-0- 


412 


-0- 


76,900 


Anson 


37.578 


22,055 


2,034 


200,385 


-0- 


1,676 


-0- 


263,728 


Ashe 


19.067 


13,656 


2,355 


65,752 


-0- 


1,504 


-0- 


102,334 


Avery 


15.219 


10,269 


561 


69,991 


-0- 


800 


-0- 


96,841 


Beaufort 


68.867 


52,746 


23,527 


283,508 


-0- 


12,150 


-0- 


440,798 


Bertie 


25,355 


20,232 


1,085 


100,018 


-0- 


668 


-0- 


147,358 


Bladen 


38.876 


32.628 


1,047 


143,579 


525 


1,724 


-0- 


218,379 


Brunswick 


56.303 


37,721 


1,253 


277,976 


2,304 


3,088 


-0- 


378,645 


Buncombe 


214.877 


127,371 


2,415 


940,157 


-0- 


44,716 


-0- 


1,329,536 


Burke 


89,781 


40,663 


10,461 


400,627 


-0- 


10,554 


-0- 


552,086 


Cabarrus 


105,406 


61,883 


22,996 


513,232 


9,611 


37,195 


-0- 


750,323 


Caldwell 


81,256 


32,852 


5,380 


398,642 


-0- 


13,686 


-0- 


531,815 


Camden 


7.461 


6,122 


459 


40,928 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


54,970 


Carteret 


76.677 


38,142 


2,124 


267,964 


-0- 


18,306 


-0- 


403,213 


Caswell 


20,922 


17,325 


3,907 


105,018 


18 


260 


55 


147,505 


Catawba 


77.387 


47,862 


9,213 


598,090 


55,683 


29,888 


-0- 


818,123 


Chatham 


38.660 


37,359 


5,047 


221,545 


11,422 


1,614 


330 


315,977 


Cherokee 


24,725 


20,574 


5,420 


104,933 


-0- 


2,769 


-0- 


158,421 


Chowan 


17,851 


12,316 


1,152 


66,464 


-0- 


3,319 


-0- 


101,102 


Clay 


7,236 


5,421 


3,406 


34,227 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


50,290 


Cleveland 


8,312 


3,082 


1,052 


25,071 


-0- 


884 


-0- 


38,401 


Columbus 


50,114 


45,967 


4,433 


171,240 


3,080 


3,540 


-0- 


278,374 


Craven 


94,398 


39,291 


11,822 


333,199 


3,548 


18,501 


-0- 


500,759 


Cumberland 


332,376 


87,475 


24,355 


902,956 


-0- 


90,617 


-0- 


1,437,778 


Currituck 


21,838 


17,525 


2,653 


103,257 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


145,273 


Dare 


70,152 


31,070 


8,174 


347,394 


-0- 


24,438 


-0- 


481,228 


Davidson 


99,155 


75,584 


13,312 


525,790 


15,904 


9,440 


-0- 


739,185 


Davie 


27,584 


19,931 


3,654 


98,298 


-0- 


304 


-0- 


149,771 


Duplin 


50,468 


29,408 


8,553 


222,141 


-0- 


1,212 


180 


311,962 


Durham 


265,320 


89,426 


11,062 


996,256 


-0- 


91,554 


-0- 


1,453,617 


Edgecombe 


60,818 


51,862 


15,091 


241,662 


39,735 


25,622 


200 


434,990 


Forsyth 


331,615 


18,986 


27,321 


1,195,204 


4,308 


137,265 


-0- 


1,714,699 


Franklin 


34,241 


20,684 


6,558 


149,536 


-0- 


804 


-0- 


211,822 


Gaston 


185,517 


105,751 


1,513 


536,080 


-0- 


31,163 


-0- 


860,024 


Gates 


13,950 


10,076 


1,905 


66,465 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


92,396 


Graham 


5,505 


4,200 


1,780 


31,134 


-0- 


52 


-0- 


42,671 


Granville 


43,255 


21,299 


5,097 


192,268 


-0- 


4,288 


120 


266,327 


Greene 


14,925 


10,728 


1,453 


74,904 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


102,010 


Guilford 


473,552 


51,941 


9,122 


1,248,086 


-0- 


183,615 


-0- 


1,966,316 


Halifax 


74,299 


56,893 


12,667 


312,648 


5,025 


12,482 


15 


474,029 


Harnett 


62,888 


47,530 


13,869 


329,490 


13,554 


4,330 


72 


471,732 


Haywood 


49,069 


35,118 


12,831 


233,225 


813 


3,625 


-0- 


334,681 


Henderson 


68,433 


36,751 


6,221 


304,287 


-0- 


5,041 


-0- 


420,733 


Hertford 


33,764 


23,140 


5,783 


148,429 


-0- 


2,694 


-0- 


213,810 


Hoke 


34,911 


23,526 


9,528 


218,193 


-0- 


1,840 


-0- 


287,998 


Hyde 


10,727 


8,214 


2,339 


55,717 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


76,997 


Iredell 


94,052 


46,842 


12,682 


460,983 


14,120 


18,048 


171 


646,898 


Jackson 


24.141 


17,839 


6,993 


109,982 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


158,954 



66 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Amounts of Fees, Fines and Forfeitures Collected by the Courts and 

Distributed to Counties and Municipalities* 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



Distributed to Counties 



Distributed to Municipalities 





Facility 


Officer 


Jail 


Fines and 


Facility 


Officer 


Jail 




County 


Fees 


Fees 


Fees 


Forfeitures 


Fees 


Fees 


Fees 


Total 


Johnston 


79,526 


53,006 


25,703 


404,932 


13,385 


13,270 


284 


590,105 


Jones 


10,556 


6,724 


30 


39,858 


-0- 


780 


-0- 


57,948 


Lee 


61,679 


36,104 


23,514 


241,395 


-0- 


13,903 


-0- 


376,595 


Lenoir 


79,917 


33,532 


12,304 


309,821 


-0- 


17,475 


-0- 


453,048 


Lincoln 


49,325 


30,395 


3,478 


187,621 


-0- 


5,524 


-0- 


276,342 


Macon 


21,525 


14,865 


1,016 


113,982 


-0- 


768 


-0- 


152,156 


Madison 


13,606 


10,796 


165 


62,726 


-0- 


428 


-0- 


87,721 


Martin 


34,226 


24,900 


580 


125,869 


1,351 


1,824 


-0- 


188,750 


McDowell 


38,570 


24,763 


1,701 


162,833 


-0- 


3,932 


-0- 


231,798 


Mecklenburg 


763,920 


89,694 


-0- 


1,941,572 


-0- 


474,540 


-0- 


3,269,726 


Mitchell 


11,631 


6,061 


3,337 


50,570 


1,260 


1,844 


-0- 


74,703 


Montgomery 


33,290 


26,821 


3,521 


128,221 


-0- 


2,804 


-0- 


194,657 


Moore 


67,790 


43,965 


989 


376,862 


4,663 


11,631 


-0- 


505,900 


Nash 


65,337 


72,635 


9,190 


404,629 


55,497 


28,821 


1,240 


637,349 


New Hanover 


174,578 


42,859 


4,719 


521,886 


520 


45,431 


-0- 


789,994 


Northampton 


28,538 


24,281 


2,479 


118,854 


760 


796 


541 


176,250 


Onslow 


158,019 


73,643 


32,514 


569,374 


-0- 


58,474 


-0- 


892,023 


Orange 


63,679 


49,732 


7,142 


343,728 


34,092 


23,212 


20 


521,605 


Pamlico 


8,766 


6,850 


990 


50,228 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


66,834 


Pasquotank 


34,170 


15,334 


4,425 


156,928 


-0- 


11,018 


-0- 


221,876 


Pender 


31,140 


23,328 


2,673 


162,349 


-0- 


691 


-0- 


220,181 


Perquimans 


13,914 


9,127 


633 


54,975 


-0- 


1,400 


-0- 


80,049 


Person 


33,182 


23,542 


3,328 


122,906 


-0- 


3,696 


-0- 


186,654 


Pitt 


140,586 


52,938 


18,774 


479,356 


13,229 


45,374 


436 


750,693 


Polk 


14,940 


10,753 


460 


87,061 


-0- 


368 


-0- 


113,582 


Randolph 


91,132 


68,616 


5,713 


452,200 


3,248 


10,027 


-0- 


630,935 


Richmond 


66,654 


37,417 


8,542 


289,060 


-0- 


3,160 


-0- 


404,833 


Robeson 


106,247 


85,190 


15,586 


624,328 


35,973 


31,624 


70 


899,018 


Rockingham 


84,729 


40,618 


5,831 


487,509 


15,878 


20,170 


-0- 


654,734 


Rowan 


105,427 


65,841 


25,665 


464,247 


-0- 


27,071 


-0- 


688,250 


Rutherford 


60,236 


35,770 


6,870 


299,262 


-0- 


7,666 


-0- 


409,804 


Sampson 


68,037 


48,574 


6,519 


248,562 


-0- 


3,715 


-0- 


375,407 


Scotland 


43,337 


29,445 


4,108 


194,634 


-0- 


5,323 


-0- 


276,847 


Stanly 


41,930 


16,151 


4,371 


227,276 


-0- 


8,453 


-0- 


298,181 


Stokes 


31,973 


20,541 


5,901 


120,548 


-0- 


1,259 


-0- 


180,221 


Surry 


62,275 


46,343 


1,949 


261,667 


1,364 


9,633 


-0- 


383,231 


Swain 


13,294 


9,440 


1,914 


71,875 


-0- 


100 


-0- 


96,623 


Transylvania 


20,377 


17,663 


5,617 


92,735 


-0- 


2,359 


-0- 


138,750 


Tyrrell 


23,186 


18,369 


2,199 


73,179 


-0- 


-0- 


-0- 


116,932 


Union 


93,687 


67,643 


9,370 


429,674 


-0- 


17,625 


-0- 


617,998 


Vance 


68,215 


25,017 


7,633 


207,845 


-0- 


9,981 


-0- 


318,690 


Wake 


574,888 


75,583 


32,556 


1,628,212 


9,346 


201,607 


5 


2,522,197 


Warren 


25,306 


17,545 


1,996 


77,597 


-0- 


232 


-0- 


122,676 


Washington 


16,729 


10,973 


2,042 


52,988 


2,573 


2,402 


-0- 


87,707 


Watauga 


35,517 


19,493 


4,522 


111,759 


-0- 


6,692 


-0- 


177,983 


Wayne 


104,128 


52,830 


9,731 


313,271 


2,640 


28,513 


-0- 


511,112 


Wilkes 


64,479 


34,294 


9,449 


258,354 


-0- 


1,945 


-0- 


368,520 


Wilson 


96,616 


63,782 


6,764 


258,506 


-0- 


21,894 


-0- 


447,562 


Yadkin 


32,688 


21,011 


5,700 


150,712 


-0- 


2,142 


-0- 


212,253 


Yancey 


11,231 


7,813 


373 


45,493 


-0- 


430 


-0- 


65,340 


State Totals 


$7,799,448 


$3,494,799 


$735,566 


$29,798,963 


$375,429 


$2,078,305 


$3,739 


$44,286,249 



♦Facility and jail fees are distributed to the respective counties and municipalities which furnished the facilities. If the officer who made the arrest or 
served the process was employed by a municipality, the officer fee is distributed to the municipality; otherwise all officer fees are distributed to the 
respective counties. By provision of the State Constitution, fines and forfeitures collected by the courts within a county are distributed to that 
county for support of the public schools. 



67 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Cost and Case Data on Representation of Indigents 
July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



The State provides legal counsel for indigent persons in a 
variety of actions and proceedings, as specified in the North 
Carolina General Statutes, Sections 7A-450 et seq. These 
include criminal proceedings, judicial hospitalization proceed- 
ings, andjuvenile proceedings which may result in commitment 
to an institution or transfer to superior court for trial as an adult. 
Legal representation for indigents may be by assignment of 
private counsel, by assignment of special public counsel 
(involving mental hospital commitments), or by assignment of 
a public defender. 

Ten defender districts, serving 12 counties, have an office of 
public defender: Districts 3 A, 3B, 12, 15B, 16A, 16B, 18, 26, 
27A, and 28. Further details on these offices are given in 
Section II of this Annual Report. In areas of the State not served 
by a public defender office, representation of indigents is 
provided by assignments of private counsel. Private counsel 
may also be assigned in the ten districts which have a public 
defender, in the event of a conflict of interest involving the 
public defender's office and the indigent, and in the event of 
unusual circumstances when, in the opinion of the court, the 
proper administration of justice requires the assignment of 
private counsel. 

The Appellate Defender Office began operation as a State- 
funded program on October 1, 1981. Pursuant to assignments 
made by trial court judges, it is the responsibility of the 
Appellate Defender and staff to provide criminal defense 
appellate services to indigent persons who are appealing their 
convictions to either the Supreme Court or the Court of 
Appeals. The Appellate Defender is appointed by and is under 
the general supervision of the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice 
may. consistent with the resources available to the Appellate 
Defender and to insure quality criminal defense services, 
authorize certain appeals to be assigned to a local public 
defender office or to private assigned counsel instead of to the 
Appellate Defender. The cost data reported on the following 



table reflect the activity of this office in both the Supreme 
Court and Court of Appeals for the fiscal year ending June 30, 
1989. 

In addition, the State provides a full-time special counsel at 
each of the State's four mental health hospitals, to represent 
patients in commitment or recommitment hearings before a 
district court judge. Under North Carolina law, each patient 
committed to a mental health hospital is entitled to a judicial 
hearing (before a district court judge) within 90 days after the 
initial commitment, a further hearing within 180 days after the 
initial commitment, and thereafter a hearing once each year 
during the continuance of an involuntary commitment. 

A juvenile alleged to be within the jurisdiction of the court 
has the right to be represented by counsel in all proceedings; 
and juveniles are conclusively presumed to be indigent and 
entitled to State-appointed and State-paid counsel (G.S. 7A- 
584). When a petition alleges that a juvenile is abused or 
neglected, the judge is required to appoint a guardian ad litem, 
and when a juvenile is alleged to be dependent, the judge may 
appoint a guardian ad litem. If the guardian ad litem is not an 
attorney, the judge in addition is to appoint an attorney to 
represent the juvenile's interests (G.S. 7A-586). Where a 
juvenile petition alleges that a juvenile is abused, neglected or 
dependent, the parent has a right to appointed counsel in cases 
of indigency (G.S. 7A-587). 

The cost of all programs of indigent representation was 
$23,425,301 in the 1988-89 fiscal year, compared to 
$22,626,046 in the 1987-88 fiscal year, an increase of 3.5%. 
The total amount expended for these activities was 13.3% of 
total Judicial Department expenditures in the 1988-89 fiscal 
year. 

Following is a summary of case and cost data for represen- 
tation of indigents for the fiscal year, July 1, 1988 through 
June 30, 1989. 



68 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Cost and Case Data on Representation of Indigents 
July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



Number 
of Cases 

598 

51,570 

7,799 

59,967 

472 



Total 
Cost 

$ 2,095,675 

11,724,097 

1,045,401 

14,865,173 

102,770 



6,519 



1,688,951 



Average 
Per Case 

$3,504 
227 
134 
248 

218 



259 



Assigned Private Counsel 

Capital offense cases 
Adult cases (other than capital) 
Juvenile cases 
Totals 

Guardian ad litem for juveniles 

Guardian ad litem volunteer and 
contract program 

Public Defender Offices** 

♦District 3A 
♦District 3B 

District 12 

District 15B 

District 16A (established January 1, 1989) 

District 16B (established January 1, 1989) 

District 18 

District 26 

District 27A 

District 28 
Totals 

Appellate Defender Office 

Special Counsel at State mental health hospitals 

Support Services 

Transcripts, records and briefs 
Professional Examinations 
Expert Witness Fees 
Total 

Indigency Screening 

N.C. Death Penalty Resource Center 

Permanent Family Task Force 

Reasonable Efforts Program 

GRAND TOTAL 

♦Defender Districts 3 A (Pitt County) and 3B (Carteret County) were established effective January 1, 1989. From July 1, 1988 to December 31, 
1988, Pitt and Carteret Counties were served by a single public defender office, within judicial district 3. 

♦♦The number of "cases" shown is the number of defendants in cases disposed of by public defenders during the 1988-89 year. 



1,544 


408,137 


264 


507 


55,851 


110 


2,941 


724,758 


246 


1,097 


244,023 


222 


407 


114,132 


280 


228 


141,001 


618 


3,179 


816,537 


257 


14,221 


1,306,922 


92 


1,954 


502,533 


257 


2,285 


403,557 


177 


28,363 


4,717,451 

575,534 
264,601 

479,878 

16,506 

132,882 

629,266 

339,316 

205,503 

12,217 

24,519 

$23,425301 


166 



69 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

State Mental Health Hospital Commitment Hearings 
July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



The total cost of providing special counsel at each of the 
State's four mental health hospitals, to represent patients in 
commitment or recommitment hearings, was $264,601 for the 
1988-89 fiscal year. There was a total of 12,308 hearings held 
during the year, for an average cost per hearing of $21.50 for 
the special counsel service. 



The following table presents data on the hearings held at 
each of the mental hospitals in 1988-89. There were 1,072 
more hearings held in 1988-89 than in 1987-88, an increase of 
9.5% in total hearings. 



Initial Hearings resulting in: 

Commitment to hospital 
Commitment to outpatient clinic 
Discharge 

Total 



Broughton Cherry 



1,038 
928 
531 

2,497 



1,602 
215 

322 

2,139 



Dorothea 
Dix 

871 
111 
611 

1,593 



John 
U instead 

1,339 
467 
635 

2,441 



Totals 

4,850 
1,721 
2,099 

8,670 



First Rehearings resulting in: 

Commitment to hospital 
Commitment to outpatient clinic 
Discharge 

Total 



130 


430 


268 


335 


1,163 


15 


18 


29 


18 


80 


18 


112 


62 


73 


265 



163 



560 



359 



426 



1,508 



Second or Subsequent Rehearings resulting in: 

Commitment to hospital 
Commitment to outpatient clinic 
Discharge 

Total 



262 


460 


312 


685 


1,719 


4 





8 


10 


22 


16 


1 


35 


80 


132 



282 



461 



355 



775 



1,873 



Modification of Prior Order Hearings resulting in: 

Commitment to hospital 
Commitment to outpatient clinic 
Discharge 

Total 



14 


5 


16 


32 


67 


7 


28 


39 


87 


161 


6 


13 


10 





29 



27 



46 



65 



119 



257 



Total Hearings or Rehearings resulting in: 

Commitment to hospital 
Commitment to outpatient clinic 
Discharge 

Grand Totals 



,444 


2,497 


1,467 


2,391 


7,799 


954 


261 


187 


582 


1,984 


571 


448 


718 


788 


2,525 



2,969 



3,206 



2,372 



3,761 



12,308 



70 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Assigned Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem 

Number of Cases and Expenditures 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 





Assigned Counsel 


Guardian Ad Litem 


District 1 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 


41 

145 
80 

286 
78 

372 

117 


63,600 
31,220 
25,489 
86,331 
16,287 
80,517 
25,340 


2 
3 
2 
9 
3 

19 
24 


332 

150 

255 

1,739 

560 

1,445 

1,394 


District Totals 


1,119 


328,783 


62 


5,874 


District 2 










Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 


445 
37 

180 
33 

127 


88,043 
8,230 
41,615 
23,312 
21,908 


1 
5 



7 


150 

330 





525 


District Totals 


822 


183,108 


13 


1,005 


District 3 A 










Pitt 


592 


192,739 


14 


1,930 


District Totals 


592 


192,739 


14 


1,930 


District 3B 










Carteret 

Craven 

Pamlico 


92 

732 
44 


19,485 

175,746 

9,325 


2 




150 




District Totals 


868 


204,556 


2 


150 


District 4 A 










Duplin 

Jones 

Sampson 


303 

45 

410 


124,476 

12,717 

118,868 


4 

1 


760 



100 


District Totals 


758 


256,061 


5 


860 


District 4B 










Onslow 


1,434 


339,729 


23 


1,852 


District Totals 


1,434 


339,729 


23 


1,852 


District 5 










New Hanover 
Pender 


1,745 
162 


556,449 
38,098 










District Totals 


1,907 


594,547 








District 6 A 










Halifax 


547 


287,733 


3 


375 


District Totals 


547 


287,733 


3 


375 


District 6B 










Bertie 

Hertford 

Northampton 


129 
306 

177 


39,377 
82,718 
62,371 


1 

17 

1 


50 
2,040 

75 


District Totals 


612 


184,466 


19 


2,165 



71 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Assigned Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem 

Number of Cases and Expenditures 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 





Assigned Counsel 


Guardian Ad Litem 


District 7 A 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Nash 


791 


220,037 








District Totals 


791 


220,037 








District 7B/C 










Edgecombe 
Wilson 


707 
851 


168,029 

217,733 


4 
1 


1,200 
150 


District Totals 


1,558 


385,762 


5 


1,350 


District 8A 










Greene 
Lenoir 


109 

789 


34,097 
211,404 



1 



195 


District Totals 


898 


245,501 


1 


195 


District 8B 










Wayne 


1,093 


289,321 


3 


890 


District Totals 


1,093 


289,321 


3 


890 


District 9 










Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 


401 
489 
310 
665 
148 


83,695 
106,375 

73,381 
153,473 

32,586 




1 
6 
1 
2 




100 

1,100 

350 

575 


District Totals 


2,013 


449,510 


10 


2,125 


District 10 










Wake 


5,393 


1,228,780 


8 


14,080 


District Totals 


5,393 


1,228,780 


8 


14,080 


District 11 










Harnett 

Johnston 

Lee 


859 

1,125 

795 


161,725 
173,120 
134,014 


1 
1 
1 


350 
100 

75 


District Totals 


2,779 


468,860 


3 


525 


District 12 










Cumberland 


872 


303,681 


2 


220 


District Totals 


872 


303,681 


2 


220 


District 13 










Bladen 

Brunswick 

Columbus 


437 
554 
660 


111,958 
199,082 
158,933 


2 
3 
8 


270 
1,358 
1,100 


District Totals 


1,651 


469,972 


13 


2,728 


District 14 










Durham 


3,306 


783,212 


8 


1,940 


District Totals 


3306 


783,212 


8 


1,940 



72 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Assigned Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem 

Number of Cases and Expenditures 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 





Assigned 


Counsel 


Guardian Ad Litem 


District 15A 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Alamance 


1,174 


342,245 








District Totals 


1,174 


342,245 








District 15B 










Chatham 
Orange 


83 
314 


16,547 
95,187 


2 
6 


800 
950 


District Totals 


397 


111,734 


8 


1,750 


District 16A 










Hoke 
Scotland 


17 
562 


5,540 
98,905 



15 



970 


District Totals 


579 


104,445 


15 


970 


District 16B 










Robeson 


1,542 


410,227 


31 


1,935 


District Totals 


1,542 


410,227 


31 


1,935 


District 17 A 










Caswell 
Rockingham 


203 
1,069 


48,130 
243,187 


6 
10 


575 
900 


District Totals 


1,272 


291,317 


16 


1,475 


District 17B 










Stokes 
Surry 


264 
494 


62,151 
128,860 


10 
1 


1,200 
100 


District Totals 


758 


191,011 


11 


1,300 


District 18 










Guilford 


1,223 


332,307 


10 


790 


District Totals 


1,223 


332,307 


10 


790 


District 19A 










Cabarrus 


839 


176,001 


6 


617 


District Totals 


839 


176,001 


6 


617 


District 19B 










Montgomery 
Randolph 


208 
762 


45,599 
161,307 


2 
12 


310 
1,830 


District Totals 


970 


206,906 


14 


2,140 


District 19C 










Rowan 


1,044 


276,173 


18 


1,870 


District Totals 


1,044 


276,173 


18 


1,870 


District 20 A 










Anson 
Moore 
Richmond 


475 
766 
972 


98,375 
156,877 
222,329 



5 





650 




District Totals 


2,213 


477,581 


5 


650 



73 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Assigned Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem 

Number of Cases and Expenditures 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 





Assigned Counsel 


Guardian Ad Litem 


District 20B 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Stanley 
Union 


363 
905 


137,648 
178,690 


2 
4 


250 
485 


District Totals 


1,268 


316,339 


6 


735 


District 21 










Forsyth 


3,767 


752,481 


11 


875 


District Totals 


3,767 


752,481 


11 


875 


District 22 










Alexander 
Davidson 
Davie 
Iredell 


295 

1,562 

229 

1,341 


67,584 
312,377 

58,759 
269,311 


2 
20 

2 

1 


200 

2,250 

425 

150 


District Totals 


3,427 


708,031 


25 


3,025 


District 23 










Alleghany 
Ashe 
Wilkes 
Yadkin 


62 
149 
579 

246 


10,673 

28,247 

101,920 

53,525 


5 

7 



625 



1,615 




District Totals 


1,036 


194,364 


12 


2,240 


District 24 










Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 


196 

115 

92 

277 
69 


44,767 
29,005 
21,055 
70,008 
21,268 


1 


6 
3 

2 


100 



1,430 

4,377 
200 


District Totals 


749 


186,103 


12 


6,107 


District 25 A 










Burke 
Caldwell 


670 
710 


170,382 

152,217 


1 



75 



District Totals 


1,380 


322,599 


1 


75 


District 25B 










Catawba 


1,301 


320,786 


1 


100 


District Totals 


1,301 


320,786 


1 


100 


District 26 










Mecklenburg 


1,536 


595,509 


38 


31,104 


District Totals 


1,536 


595,509 


38 


31,104 


District 27 A 










Gaston 


262 


66,200 


2 


150 


District Totals 


262 


66,200 


2 


150 



74 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT FINANCES 

Assigned Counsel and Guardian Ad Litem 

Number of Cases and Expenditures 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 





Assigned Counsel 


Guardian Ad Litem 


District 27 B 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Number of Cases 


Expenditures 


Cleveland 
Lincoln 


448 
220 


161,749 
55,093 


7 



575 



District Totals 


668 


216,842 


7 


575 


District 28 










Buncombe 


451 


85,346 


4 


280 


District Totals 


451 


85,346 


4 


280 


District 29 










Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 


692 
289 
107 

522 
203 


160,497 
95,853 
31,275 

117,490 
59,694 




3 
1 







300 

100 






District Totals 


1,813 


464,809 


4 


400 


District 30A 










Cherokee 

Clay 

Graham 

Macon 

Swain 


176 
38 
62 

301 
99 


56,135 
7,478 
13,438 
42,942 
19,892 


1 


3 
5 
1 


60 



3,000 

1,220 

75 


District Totals 


676 


139,885 


10 


4,355 


District 30B 










Haywood 
Jackson 


465 
144 


110,430 
49,146 


10 

1 


640 
350 


District Totals 


609 


159,576 


11 


990 


STATE TOTALS 


59,967 


$14,865,173 


472 


$102,770 



75 



JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL 

(Positions and salaries authorized as of June 30, 1989) 

Positions 

Authorized Salary Ranges 
SUPREME COURT 

Justices $ 79,668-81,348* 

28 Staff Personnel (Clerk's and Reporter's offices 

law clerks, library staff) $ 13,884-59,940 

Secretarial personnel $ 25,620-26,712 

COURT OF APPEALS 

12 Judges $ 75,432-77,124* 

39 Staff personnel (Clerk's office, prehearing staff, 

Judicial Standards Commission staff, law clerks) $ 13,332-52,212 

12 Secretarial personnel $ 24,528-25,620 

SUPERIOR COURT 

77 Judges $ 66,972-69,180* 

84 Staff personnel $ 20,844-50,268 

Secretarial personnel $ 7,218-30,216 

DISTRICT COURT 

162 Judges $ 56,820-59,076* 

644 Magistrates $ 14,712-25,1 16 

29 Staff personnel $ 16,644-25,884 

26 Secretarial personnel $ 15,624-24,252 

DISTRICT ATTORNEYS 

36 District Attorneys $ 62,316* 

282 Staff personnel $ 20,844-61,656 

137 Secretarial personnel $ 14,436-26,436 

CLERKS OF SUPERIOR COURT 

100 Clerks of Superior Court $ 36,288-53,832* 

1.678 Staff personnel $ 14,436-30,912 

INDIGENT REPRESENTATION 

1 Appellate Defender $ 62,316 

8 Assistant Appellate Defenders $ 24,000-44,356 

3 Secretarial personnel $ 16,800-23,208 

10 Public Defenders $ 62,316* 

79 Staff personnel $ 22,236-60,500 

28 Secretarial personnel $ 15,000-22,476 

4 Special counsel at mental hospitals $ 13,008-35,016 

4 Secretarial personnel $ 17,340-19,560 

1 Guardian ad Litem, Program Administrator $ 47,424 

2 1 Program Coordinators $ 9,984-25,344 

2 Program Managers $ 13,800-18,804 

Secretarial personnel $ 7,218-10,935 

8 Program assistants $ 8,136- 9,216 

JUVENILE PROBATION AND AFTERCARE 

298 Court counselors $ 17,664-43,680 

47 Secretarial personnel $ 7,902-23,208 

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS 

1 Administrative Officer of the Courts $ 69,180* 

1 Assistant Director $ 56,388* 

1 61 Staff personnel $ 14,436-76,056 

*In addition to the salaries given here, these categories are entitled to a longevity allowance for years of service. 

76 



PART IV 



TRIAL COURTS CASEFLOW DATA 

• Superior Court Division 

• District Court Division 



TRIAL COURTS CASE DATA 



This part of the Annual Report presents pertinent data on a 
district-by-district and county-by-county basis. For ease of 
reference, this part is divided into a superior court division 
section and a district court division section. 

The data within the two sections is generally parallel in terms 
of organization, with each section subdivided into civil and 
criminal case categories. With some exceptions, there are three 
basic data tables for each case category: a caseload inventory 
(filings, dispositions and pending) table; a table on the manner 
of dispositions; and a table on ages of cases disposed of during 
the year and ages of cases pending at the end of the year. 
Pending and age data are not provided for district court motor 
vehicle criminal cases, infractions, civil cases (small claims) 
referred to magistrates, or juvenile cases, as these categories of 
cases are not reported by case file number. 

The caseload inventory tables provide a statistical picture of 
caseflow during the 1988-89 year. Inventory tables show the 
number of cases pending at the beginning of the year, the 
number of new cases filed, the number of cases disposed of 
during the year, and the number of cases left pending at the end 
of the year. The caseload inventory also shows the total 
caseload (the number pending at the beginning of the year plus 
the number filed during the year) and the percentage of the 
caseload which was disposed of during the year. 

The aging tables show the ages of the cases pending on June 
30, 1989 as well as the ages of the cases disposed of during 
1988-89. These tables also show both mean (average) and 
median ages for cases pending at the end of the year, and cases 
that were disposed of during the year. The median age of a 
group of cases is, by definition, the age of a hypothetical case 
which is older than 50% of the total set of cases and younger 
than the other 50%. 

Unlike the median, the mean age can be substantially raised 
(or lowered) if even a small number of very old (or very young) 
cases are included. For example, if only a single two-year old 
case was included with ten cases aged three months, the median 
age would be 90 days and the mean (average) age would be 
148.2 days. A substantial difference between the median and 
average ages, therefore, indicates the presence of a number of 
cases at the relative extremes, with either very high or very low 
ages. 

The great bulk of caseload statistics is now handled by 



automated processing rather than manual processing. Automated 
processing covers all case categories except estates, special 
proceedings, and juvenile proceedings. As of June 30, 1989, 81 
counties were on the criminal module and 82 counties were on 
the civil and infractions modules of the Administrative Office 
of the Court's Court Information System (CIS). (Mecklenburg 
County has its own county-based processing system for 
criminal cases.) 

The case statistics in Part IV have been summarized from the 
automated filing and disposition case data, as well as from 
manually reported case data. Pending case information is 
calculated from the filing and disposition data. The accuracy of 
the pending case figures is, of course, dependent upon timely 
and accurate data on filings and dispositions. 

Periodic comparisons by clerk personnel of their actual 
pending case files against the Administrative Office of the 
Court's (AOC's) computer-produced pending case lists, fol- 
lowed by indicated corrections, is necessary to maintain 
completely accurate data in the AOC computer file. Yet, staff 
resource in the clerks' offices is not sufficient to make such 
physical inventory checks as frequently and as completely as 
would be necessary to maintain full accuracy in the AOC's 
computer files. Thus, it is recognized that there is some margin 
of error in the figures published in the following tables. 

Another accuracy-related problem inherent in the AOC's 
reporting system is the lack of absolute consistency in the 
published year-end and year-beginning pending figures. The 
number of cases pending at the end of a reporting year should 
ideally be identical to the number of published pending cases at 
the beginning of the next reporting year. In reality, this is rarely 
the case. Experience has shown that inevitably some filings and 
dispositions that occurred in the preceding year do not get 
reported until the subsequent year. The later-reported data are 
regarded as being more complete and are used in the current 
year's tables, thereby producing some differences between the 
prior year's end-pending figures and the current year's begin- 
pending figures. 

Notwithstanding the indicated limitations in the data report- 
ing and data-processing system, it is believed that the published 
figures are sufficiently adequate to fully justify their use. In any 
event, the published figures are the best and most accurate data 
currently available. 



79 



PART IV, Section 1 



Superior Court Division 
Caseflow Data 






The Superior Court Division 



This section contains data tables and accompanying charts 
depicting the 1988-89 caseflow of cases pending, filed, and 
disposed of in the State's superior courts before superior court 
judges. Data are also presented on cases filed and disposed of 
before the 100 clerks of superior court, who have original 
jurisdiction over estate cases and special proceedings. 

There are, for statistical reporting purposes, three categories 
of cases filed in the superior courts: civil cases (excluding estates 
and special proceedings), felony cases that are within the 
original jurisdiction of the superior courts, and misdemeanors. 
Most misdemeanor cases in superior court are appeals from 
convictions in district court; however, the superior courts have 
original jurisdiction over misdemeanors in four instances 
defined in G.S. 7A-271, which includes among others, the 
initiation of charges by presentment, and certain situations 
where a misdemeanor charge is consolidated with a felony 
charge. 

During 1988-89, as in previous years, the greatest proportion 
of superior court filings were felonies (53.1%), followed by 
misdemeanors (32.0%) and civil cases (14.9%). Following the 
general trend over the past decade, the total number of case 
filings increased significantly. During 1988-89, total case filings 
in superior courts increased by 1 1 .8% from the preceding fiscal 
year (from 105,704 total cases to 1 18,188). Filings of civil cases 
increased by 5.0%, felony filings increased by 13.5%, and 
misdemeanor filings increased by 12.4%. 

Superior court civil cases generally take much longer to 
dispose of than do criminal cases. During 1988-89, the median 
age at disposition of civil cases was 297 days, compared to a 
median age at disposition of 85 days for felonies and 72 days for 
misdemeanors. A similar pattern exists for the ages of pending 
cases. The median ages of superior court cases pending on June 
30, 1989, was 219 days for civil cases, 91 days for felonies, and 
79 days for misdemeanors. 

These differences in the median ages of civil versus criminal 
cases in superior courts can be attributed in part to the priority 
given criminal cases. In criminal cases, a defendant has a right 
to a "speedy trial" guaranteed by both the United States and 
North Carolina Constitutions and by the North Carolina 
Speedy Trial Act (G.S. 15A-701 etseq.). The Speedy Trial Act 
requires cases to go to trial within 120 days of filing unless there 
has been justifiable delay for one or more of the reasons set out 
in the statute. During 1988-89, 26 criminal cases were 
dismissed under the Speedy Trial Act. 

There is no comparable statutory standard for speedy 



disposition of civil cases in North Carolina, although the North 
Carolina Constitution does provide that "right and justice shall 
be administered without favor, denial, or delay" (Article I, 
Section 18, N.C. Constitution). 

From 1987-88 to 1988-89, for civil cases, the median age at 
disposition increased from 293 days to 297 days, whereas the 
median age of cases pending on June 30, 1989, remained at 
219 days. For felony cases, the median age at disposition 
decreased from 86 days to 85 days, but the median age of cases 
pending on June 30, 1989, jumped from 79 days to 91 days. 
For misdemeanor cases, the median age at disposition increased 
from 70 days to 72 days, and the median age of cases pending 
increased from 78 days to 79 days. 

The three major case categories (civil, felonies, and misde- 
meanors) may be broken down into more specific case types. In 
the civil category, negligence cases comprised 44.8% of total 
civil filings in superior courts (7,879 of 17,601 total civil 
filings). Contract cases comprised the next largest category of 
civil case filings, at 25.9% (4,558 filings). Felony case filings 
were dominated by the following types of cases: controlled 
substances violations, 24.7% (15,505 of 62,752 total filings); 
burglary and breaking or entering, 20.1% (12,626 filings); 
forgery and uttering, 12.6% (7,898 filings); and larceny, 1 1.7% 
(7,337 filings). Non-motor vehicle appeals comprised 53.2% of 
misdemeanor filings in superior courts (20,130 of 37,835 total 
filings). 

Case dispositions in 1988-89 increased by 10.4% over last 
fiscal year (from 100,808 to 111,278 superior court disposi- 
tions). Jury trials continued to account for a low percentage of 
case dispositions: 5.0% of civil cases (840 of 16,653 civil 
dispositions); 3.2% of felonies (1,880 of 58,453 felony dispo- 
sitions); and 2.6% of misdemeanors (950 of 36,172 misdemeanor 
dispositions). Over half (55.8%) of all civil dispositions were by 
voluntary dismissal (9,289 of 16,653 civil dispositions). As in 
previous years, most criminal cases were disposed of by guilty 
plea; 64.7% of all felony dispositions (37,833 of 58,453), and 
37.4% of all misdemeanor dispositions ( 1 3,5 1 6 of 36, 1 72) were 
by guilty plea, with almost 83% of these being to the offense as 
charged. 

The total number of cases disposed of in superior courts in 
1988-89 was 6,910 cases less than the total number of cases 
filed. Consequently, the total number of pending cases in 
superior courts increased from 46,442 at the beginning of the 
fiscal year to a total at year's end of 53,352, an increase of 
14.9%. 



83 



CASELOAD TRENDS IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

1979-80 — 1988-89 



r 

M 
B 
E 

R 

O 
F 

C 

A 
S 

I 
s 




Filines 



Dispositions 



End Pending 



120,000 



90,000 



60,000 



30,000 



79-80 80-81 81-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 87-88 88-89 



Superior court filings have increased each of the last five years, 
with the largest increase. 11.8%, occurring during 1988-89. 
Superior court dispositions have also increased, but not as 
quickly, resulting in an increase in the number of cases pending 



at the end of each of the past five years. There were 53,352 
cases pending in superior court on June 30, 1 989, an increase of 
13.0% over the year before. 



84 



SUPERIOR COURT CASELOAD 
July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



62,752 



58,453 



19,769 



16,1 



27 jZjJJJ 16.653 17,075 



37,835 



36,172 



24,068 
film 



10,546 



12,209 






CIVIL 



FELONIES 



MISDEMEANORS 



Begin Pending ■ Filings 



d Dispositions S3 End Pending 



A comparison with last year's Figures indicates that superior 
court filings increased in all categories during 1988-89 — 
felony Filings by 13.5%, misdemeanor Filings by 12.4%, and civil 
filings by 5.0%. Although dispositions also increased in each 
category, they did not keep pace with filings. As a result, the 



number of cases pending on June 30, 1989, increased in all 
superior court categories over the year before. Pending felonies 
increased by 21.7%, pending misdemeanors by 15.8%, and 
pending civil cases by 5.9%. 



85 



MEDIAN AGES OF SUPERIOR COURT CASES 



Median Ages (in Days) of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 



CIVIL 



FELONY 



MISDEMEANOR 




219.0 



Median Ages (in Days) of Cases Disposed During 1988-89 



CIVIL 



FELONY 



MISDEMEANOR 




297.0 



The median age is that age with respect to which half the cases 
in the category are younger and half are older. As shown, the 
median ages of civil superior court cases pending and disposed 
during 1988-89 are greater than the corresponding ages of 



felony and misdemeanor cases. From 1987-88 to 1988-89, the 
median age of pending felonies increased from 79 days to 91 
days. 



86 



CASELOAD TRENDS OF CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

1979-80 — 1988-89 



End Pending 



N 
U 
M 
B 
E 
R 

O 
F 

C 

A 
S 
E 

S 




Dispositions 



18,000 



12,000 



6,000 



79-80 80-81 



81-82 



82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 87-88 88-89 



During 1 988-89, civil filings in the superior courts increased by 
5.0% over the previous fiscal year, while dispositions increased 
by 6.2%. There were 17,601 civil cases filed and 16,653 
disposed in the superior courts during 1988-89. The difference 



accounts for the 5.9% increase in the number of cases pending 
June 30,1989 as compared to the number pending on July 1 
1988. 



87 



FILINGS OF CIVIL CASES IN THE 
SUPERIOR COURTS BY TYPE OF CASE 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



Other (2,132) 



Administrative Appeal 

(477) 



Real Property (1,260) 



Other Negligence 
(2,180) 




Contract (4,558) 



Collection on Account 
(1,295) 



Motor Vehicle 
Negligence (5,699) 



While total civil superior filings increased 5.0% in 1988-89, 
non-motor vehicle negligence cases and real property cases 
actually declined in number compared to 1987-88 (from 2,352 
to 2,180 and from 1,399 to 1,260 respectively). Most of the 



growth came in contract cases, which increased from 3,969 to 
4,558 cases, a 14.8% increase. (The "Other" category includes 
non-negligent torts such as conversion of property, civil fraud, 
and civil assault.) 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL CASES 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 





Begin 










End 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/88 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


District 1 














Camden 


13 


5 


18 


9 


50.0% 


9 


Chowan 


28 


24 


52 


23 


44.2% 


29 


Currituck 


78 


45 


123 


57 


46.3% 


66 


Dare 


113 


159 


272 


129 


47.4% 


143 


Gates 


11 


12 


23 


10 


43.5% 


13 


Pasquotank 


57 


76 


133 


59 


44.4% 


74 


Perquimans 


23 


17 


40 


10 


25.0% 


30 


District Totals 


323 


338 


661 


297 


44.9% 


364 


District 2 














Beaufort 


67 


68 


135 


75 


55.6% 


60 


Hyde 


21 


16 


37 


17 


45.9% 


20 


Martin 


45 


39 


84 


43 


51.2% 


41 


Tyrrell 


6 


7 


13 


8 


61.5% 


5 


Washington 


28 


35 


63 


34 


54.0% 


29 


District Totals 


167 


165 


332 


177 


53.3% 


155 


District 3A 














Pitt 


236 


353 


589 


348 


59.1% 


241 


District 3B 














Carteret 


215 


170 


385 


210 


54.5% 


175 


Craven 


235 


220 


455 


227 


49.9% 


228 


Pamlico 


16 


22 


38 


18 


47.4% 


20 


District Totals 


466 


412 


878 


455 


51.8% 


423 


District 4A 














Duplin 


93 


85 


178 


77 


43.3% 


101 


Jones 


25 


10 


35 


15 


42.9% 


20 


Sampson 


50 


64 


114 


54 


47.4% 


60 


District Totals 


168 


159 


327 


146 


44.6% 


181 


District 4B 














Onslow 


419 


316 


735 


329 


44.8% 


406 


District 5 














New Hanover 


472 


466 


938 


414 


44.1% 


524 


Pender 


63 


41 


104 


45 


43.3% 


59 


District Totals 


535 


507 


1,042 


459 


44.0% 


583 


District 6A 














Halifax 


107 


76 


183 


90 


49.2% 


93 



89 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL CASES 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Begin 
Pending 

7/1/88 



District 6B 




Bertie 


24 


Hertford 


32 


Northampton 


25 


District Totals 


81 


District 7A 




Nash 


145 


District 7B-C 




Edgecombe 


98 


Wilson 


115 


District Totals 


213 


District 8A 




Greene 


33 


Lenoir 


156 


District Totals 


189 


District 8B 




Wayne 


231 


District 9 




Franklin 


70 


Granville 


52 


Person 


54 


Vance 


84 


Warren 


38 


District Totals 


298 


District 10A-D 




Wake 


1,594 


District 11 




Harnett 


117 


Johnston 


200 


Lee 


69 


District Totals 


386 


District 12A-C 




Cumberland 


481 





Total 


led 


Caseload 


27 


51 


48 


80 


25 


50 



100 



184 



116 
132 

248 



25 
205 

230 



276 



62 
60 
52 
% 
41 

311 



1,752 



148 

205 

93 

446 



526 



181 



329 



214 
247 

461 



58 
361 

419 



507 



132 
112 
106 
180 
79 

609 



3,346 



265 
405 
162 

832 



1,007 







End 




% Caseload 


Pending 


posed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


28 


54.9% 


23 


33 


41.3% 


47 


29 


58.0% 


21 



90 



173 



112 
116 

228 



32 
193 

225 



247 



63 

47 
52 
87 
33 

282 



1,499 



122 

159 

82 

363 



592 



49.7% 



52.6% 



52.3% 
47.0% 

49.5% 



55.2% 
53.5% 

53.7% 



48.7% 



47.7% 
42.0% 
49.1% 
48.3% 
41.8% 

46.3% 



44.8% 



46.0% 
39.3% 
50.6% 

43.6% 



58.8% 



91 



156 



102 
131 

233 



26 
168 

194 



260 



69 
65 
54 
93 
46 

327 



1,847 



143 

246 

80 

469 



415 



90 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL CASES 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 



District 13 

Bladen 

Brunswick 

Columbus 


Begin 
Pending 

7/1/88 

42 
143 
156 


Filed 

48 
108 
115 


Total 
Caseload 

90 

251 
271 


Disposed 

42 

122 

94 


% Caseload 
Disposed 

46.7% 
48.6% 
34.7% 


End 
Pending 
6/30/89 

48 
129 
177 


District Totals 


341 


271 


612 


258 


42.2% 


354 


District 14A-B 

Durham 


619 


687 


1,306 


735 


56.3% 


571 


District ISA 

Alamance 


156 


213 


369 


181 


49.1% 


188 


District 15B 

Chatham 
Orange 


34 
165 


67 
201 


101 
366 


51 
191 


50.5% 

52.2% 


50 
175 


District Totals 


199 


268 


467 


242 


51.8% 


225 


District 16A 

Hoke 
Scotland 


18 
62 


16 
54 


34 
116 


21 
58 


61.8% 
50.0% 


13 
58 


District Totals 


80 


70 


150 


79 


52.7% 


71 


District 16B 

Robeson 


243 


320 


563 


269 


47.8% 


294 


District 17A 

Caswell 
Rockingham 


19 
102 


18 
126 


37 
228 


20 
144 


54.1% 
63.2% 


17 
84 


District Totals 


121 


144 


265 


164 


61.9% 


101 


District 17B 

Stokes 
Surry 


15 
73 


20 
126 


35 
199 


28 
105 


80.0% 

52.8% 


7 
94 


District Totals 


88 


146 


234 


133 


56.8% 


101 


District 18A-E 

Guilford 


978 


1,197 


2,175 


1,123 


51.6% 


1,052 


District 19A 

Cabarrus 


149 


191 


340 


172 


50.6% 


168 


District 19B 

Montgomery 
Randolph 


33 
135 


26 
135 


59 
270 


28 
144 


47.5% 
53.3% 


31 
126 


District Totals 


168 


161 


329 


172 


52.3% 


157 



91 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL CASES 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 - June 30, 1989 





Begin 










End 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pendir 




7/1/88 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/8 


District 19C 














Rowan 


142 


187 


329 


167 


50.8% 


162 


District 20A 














Anson 


46 


48 


94 


49 


52.1% 


45 


Moore 


111 


130 


241 


116 


48.1% 


125 


Richmond 


81 


88 


169 


70 


41.4% 


99 


District Totals 


238 


266 


504 


235 


46.6% 


269 


District 20B 














Stanly 


99 


61 


160 


61 


38.1% 


99 


Union 


177 


184 


361 


161 


44.6% 


200 


District Totals 


276 


245 


521 


222 


42.6% 


299 


District 21A-D 














Forsyth 


595 


875 


1,470 


749 


51.0% 


721 


District 22 














Alexander 


24 


44 


68 


31 


45.6% 


37 


Davidson 


139 


172 


311 


174 


55.9% 


137 


Davie 


40 


44 


84 


51 


60.7% 


33 


Iredell 


150 


210 


360 


200 


55.6% 


160 


District Totals 


353 


470 


823 


456 


55.4% 


367 


District 23 














Alleghany 


13 


15 


28 


17 


60.7% 


11 


Ashe 


24 


29 


53 


35 


66.0% 


18 


Wilkes 


140 


158 


298 


136 


45.6% 


162 


Yadkin 


34 


35 


69 


31 


44.9% 


38 


District Totals 


211 


237 


448 


219 


48.9% 


229 


District 24 














Avery 


36 


44 


80 


47 


58.8% 


33 


Madison 


39 


35 


74 


38 


51.4% 


36 


Mitchell 


24 


31 


55 


31 


56.4% 


24 


Watauga 


90 


104 


194 


104 


53.6% 


90 


Yancey 


19 


18 


37 


18 


48.6% 


19 


District Totals 


208 


232 


440 


238 


54.1% 


202 


District 25A 














Burke 


116 


175 


291 


149 


51.2% 


142 


Caldwell 


167 


165 


332 


158 


47.6% 


174 


District Totals 


283 


340 


623 


307 


49.3% 


316 


DLstrict 25B 














Catawba 


212 


341 


553 


283 


51.2% 


270 



92 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL CASES 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 





Begin 










End 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/88 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


District 26 AC 














Mecklenburg 


2,622 


2,469 


5,091 


2,319 


45.6% 


2,772 


District 27 A 














Gaston 


446 


524 


970 


572 


59.0% 


398 


District 27B 














Cleveland 


125 


132 


257 


112 


43.6% 


145 


Lincoln 


60 


96 


156 


63 


40.4% 


93 


District Totals 


185 


228 


413 


175 


42.4% 


238 


District 28 














Buncombe 


388 


504 


892 


492 


55.2% 


400 


District 29 














Henderson 


212 


159 


371 


164 


44.2% 


207 


McDowell 


60 


46 


106 


52 


49.1% 


54 


Polk 


15 


17 


32 


17 


53.1% 


15 


Rutherford 


80 


64 


144 


75 


52.1% 


69 


Transylvania 


64 


41 


105 


55 


52.4% 


50 


District Totals 


431 


327 


758 


363 


47.9% 


395 


District 30A 














Cherokee 


25 


35 


60 


28 


46.7% 


32 


Clay 


11 


14 


25 


13 


52.0% 


12 


Graham 


14 


19 


33 


16 


48.5% 


17 


Macon 


78 


59 


137 


63 


46.0% 


74 


Swain 


28 


13 


41 


19 


46.3% 


22 


District Totals 


156 


140 


296 


139 


47.0% 


157 


District 30B 














Haywood 


133 


109 


242 


129 


53.3% 


113 


Jackson 


67 


40 


107 


60 


56.1% 


47 


District Totals 


200 


149 


349 


189 


54.2% 


160 


State Totals 


16,127 


17,601 


33,728 


16,653 


49.4% 


17,075 



93 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



Voluntary Dismissal 
(9,289) 




Final Order or Judgment 

Without Trial (Judge) 

(2,718) 



Clerk (1,169) 



Other 
(610) 

Trial by Jury 
(840) 



Trial by Judge (2,027) 



Compared to 1987-88, the number of voluntary dismissals, 
final orders without trial (which include summary and consent 
judgments), and dispositions by clerks increased in 1988-89. 
For example, the number of orders without trial increased from 
2.284 to 2.718. and the number of voluntary dismissals from 



8,702 to 9,289. The number of trials decreased, from a total of 
3,174 in 1987-88 to 2,867 in 1988-89. The "other" category 
includes miscellaneous dispositions such as discontinuances for 
lack of service of process under Civil Rule 4(e), dismissal on 
motion of the court, and removal to federal court. 



94 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF 

CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 - June 30, 1989 

Judge's 
Final Order 





Trial by 


Voluntary 


or Judgment 






Total 




Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 


Dispositions 


District 1 
















Camden 








6 


2 





1 


9 


Chowan 





5 


14 


2 


1 


1 


23 


Currituck 





6 


27 


22 


1 


1 


57 


Dare 


1 


8 


66 


31 


20 


3 


129 


Gates 


1 





5 





1 


3 


10 


Pasquotank 





13 


28 


5 


8 


5 


59 


Perquimans 





1 


3 


2 





4 


10 


District Totals 


2 


33 


149 


64 


31 


18 


297 


% of Total 


0.7% 


11.1% 


50.2% 


21.5% 


10.4% 


6.1% 


100.0% 


District 2 
















Beaufort 


3 


4 


39 


22 


5 


2 


75 


Hyde 





9 


5 


2 


1 





17 


Martin 


3 


1 


21 


17 


1 





43 


Tyrrell 








4 


1 


1 


2 


8 


Washington 


1 


2 


16 


6 


6 


3 


34 


District Totals 


7 


16 


85 


48 


14 


7 


177 


% of Total 


4.0% 


9.0% 


48.0% 


27.1% 


7.9% 


4.0% 


100.0% 


District 3A 
















Pitt 


11 


77 


208 


23 


23 


6 


348 


% of Total 


3.2% 


22.1% 


59.8% 


6.6% 


6.6% 


1.7% 


100.0% 


District 3B 
















Carteret 


17 


37 


101 


28 


18 


9 


210 


Craven 


13 


27 


123 


32 


20 


12 


227 


Pamlico 


1 


2 


8 


5 





2 


18 


District Totals 


31 


66 


232 


65 


38 


23 


455 


% of Total 


6.8% 


14.5% 


51.0% 


14.3% 


8.4% 


5.1% 


100.0% 


District 4A 
















Duplin 


3 


6 


42 


17 


2 


7 


77 


Jones 


1 


2 


8 


2 





2 


15 


Sampson 


4 


15 


22 


1 


4 


8 


54 


District Totals 


8 


23 


72 


20 


6 


17 


146 


% of Total 


5.5% 


15.8% 


49.3% 


13.7% 


4.1% 


11.6% 


100.0% 


District 4B 
















Onslow 


10 


35 


210 


37 


17 


20 


329 


% of Total 


3.0% 


10.6% 


63.8% 


1 1 .2% 


5.2% 


6.1% 


100.0% 



95 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF 

CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Judge's 
Final Order 



District 5 

New Hanover 
Pender 


Trial by 
Jury Judge 

25 47 
3 8 


Voluntary 
Dismissal 

242 
23 


or Judgment 
without Trial 

79 
8 


Clerk 

13 

1 


Other 

8 

2 


Total 
Dispositions 

414 
45 


District Totals 
% of Total 


28 
6.1% 


55 
12.0% 


265 

57.7% 


87 
19.0% 


14 
3.1% 


10 

2.2% 


459 

100.0% 


District 6A 

Halifax 

% of Total 


1 
1.1% 


20 
22.2% 


62 
68.9% 


4 
4.4% 


3 
3.3% 



0.0% 


90 
100.0% 


District 6B 

Bertie 

Hertford 

Northampton 


1 
1 



4 

2 

10 


15 
18 
14 


3 
4 

1 


1 
6 
3 


4 

2 
1 


28 
33 
29 


District Totals 
% of Total 


2 
2.2% 


16 
17.8% 


47 
52.2% 


8 
8.9% 


10 
11.1% 


7 
7.8% 


90 
100.0% 


District 7A 
Nash 

% of Total 


5 
2.9% 


11 
6.4% 


98 
56.6% 


47 
27.2% 


9 

5.2% 


3 
1.7% 


173 
100.0% 


District 7B-C 

Edgecombe 
Wilson 


3 
3 


12 
19 


68 
74 


21 
8 


4 
9 


4 
3 


112 
116 


District Totals 
% of Total 


6 
2.6% 


31 
13.6% 


142 
62.3% 


29 
12.7% 


13 
5.7% 


7 
3.1% 


228 
100.0% 


District 8A 

Greene 
Lenoir 


3 
11 




22 


20 
106 


4 
24 


1 

28 


4 

2 


32 
193 


District Totals 
% of Total 


14 
6.2% 


22 
9.8% 


126 

56.0% 


28 
12.4% 


29 

12.9% 


6 
2.7% 


225 
100.0% 


District 8B 

Wayne 

% of Total 


9 
3.6% 


43 
17.4% 


160 

64.8% 


19 
7.7% 


16 
6.5% 



0.0% 


247 
100.0% 



96 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF 

CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Judge's 
Final Order 
Trial by Voluntary 





Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


District 9 








Franklin 


2 


6 


52 


Granville 


3 


3 


27 


Person 


4 


4 


28 


Vance 


5 


30 


45 


Warren 








18 


District Totals 


14 


43 


170 


% of Total 


5.0% 


15.2% 


60.3% 


District 10A-D 








Wake 


46 


46 


685 


% of Total 


3.1% 


3.1% 


45.7% 


District 11 








Harnett 


9 


14 


71 


Johnston 


15 


15 


95 


Lee 


7 


13 


40 


District Totals 


31 


42 


206 


% of Total 


8.5% 


11.6% 


56.7% 


District 12A-C 








Cumberland 


34 


65 


386 


% of Total 


5.7% 


11.0% 


65.2% 


District 13 








Bladen 


6 


6 


21 


Brunswick 


16 


13 


56 


Columbus 


10 


16 


55 


District Totals 


32 


35 


132 


% of Total 


12.4% 


13.6% 


51.2% 


District 14A-B 








Durham 


23 


84 


388 


% of Total 


3.1% 


11.4% 


52.8% 


District ISA 








Alamance 


6 


36 


107 


% of Total 


3.3% 


19.9% 


59.1% 



udgment 
out Trial 


Clerk 


Other 


Total 
Dispositions 


1 

11 

8 

2 

11 



3 


2 
3 


2 

8 
3 

1 


63 

47 
52 
87 
33 


33 
11.7% 


8 
2.8% 


14 
5.0% 


282 
100.0% 


486 

32.4% 


201 

13.4% 


35 
2.3% 


1,499 
100.0% 


24 
31 
15 


2 
2 

7 


2 
1 



122 
159 

82 


70 
19.3% 


11 
3.0% 


3 
0.8% 


363 
100.0% 


64 
10.8% 


18 
3.0% 


25 
4.2% 


592 
100.0% 


6 

28 
6 


1 
7 
5 


2 

2 
2 


42 

122 

94 


40 
15.5% 


13 
5.0% 


6 

2.3% 


258 
100.0% 


89 
12.1% 


67 
9.1% 


84 
11.4% 


735 
100.0% 


23 
12.7% 


6 
3.3% 


3 
1.7% 


181 
100.0% 



97 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF 
CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Judge's 
Final Order 





Trial 


by 


Voluntary 


or Judgment 






Total 




Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 


Dispositions 


District 15B 
















Chatham 


2 


3 


19 


18 


8 


1 


51 


Orange 


10 


55 


98 


6 


18 


4 


191 


District Totals 


12 


58 


117 


24 


26 


5 


242 


% of Total 


5.0% 


24.0% 


48.3% 


9.9% 


10.7% 


2.1% 


100.0% 


District 16A 
















Hoke 


1 


6 


11 


2 


1 





21 


Scotland 


3 


3 


36 


13 


3 





58 


District Totals 


4 


9 


47 


15 


4 





79 


% of Total 


5.1% 


11.4% 


59.5% 


19.0% 


5.1% 


0.0% 


100.0% 


District 16B 
















Robeson 


16 


49 


191 


4 


5 


4 


269 


% of Total 


5.9% 


18.2% 


71.0% 


1.5% 


1.9% 


1.5% 


100.0% 


District 17A 
















Caswell 





2 


11 


4 





3 


20 


Rockingham 


13 


13 


77 


23 


10 


8 


144 


District Totals 


13 


15 


88 


27 


10 


11 


164 


% of Total 


7.9% 


9.1% 


53.7% 


16.5% 


6.1% 


6.7% 


100.0% 


District 17B 
















Stokes 





8 


14 


5 


1 





28 


Surry 


4 


5 


53 


38 


5 





105 


District Totals 


4 


13 


67 


43 


6 





133 


% of Total 


3.0% 


9.8% 


50.4% 


32.3% 


4.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 


District 18A-E 
















Guilford 


46 


178 


621 


137 


81 


60 


1,123 


% of Total 


4.1% 


15.9% 


55.3% 


12.2% 


7.2% 


5.3% 


100.0% 


District 19A 
















Cabarrus 


7 


17 


112 


20 


4 


12 


172 


% of Total 


4.1% 


9.9% 


65.1% 


1 1 .6% 


2.3% 


7.0% 


100.0% 


District 19B 
















Montgomery 





8 


19 


1 








28 


Randolph 


9 


33 


62 


28 


4 


8 


144 


District Totals 


9 


41 


81 


29 


4 


8 


172 


% of Total 


5.2% 


23.8% 


47.1% 


16.9% 


2.3% 


4.7% 


100.0% 


District 19C 
















Rowan 


20 


6 


108 


23 


5 


5 


167 


% of Total 


12.0% 


3.6% 


64.7% 


13.8% 


3.0% 


3.0% 


100.0% 



98 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF 

CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 











Judge's 
















Final Order 










Trial by 


Voluntary 


or Judgment 






Total 




Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 


Dispositions 


District 20A 
















Anson 


3 


14 


25 


4 


3 





49 


Moore 


8 


31 


62 


5 


9 


1 


116 


Richmond 


1 


12 


47 


7 


3 





70 


District Totals 


12 


57 


134 


16 


15 


1 


235 


% of Total 


5.1% 


24.3% 


57.0% 


6.8% 


6.4% 


0.4% 


100.0% 


District 20B 
















Stanly 


3 


10 


38 


10 








61 


Union 


13 


17 


102 


13 


13 


3 


161 


District Totals 


16 


27 


140 


23 


13 


3 


222 


% of Total 


7.2% 


12.2% 


63.1% 


10.4% 


5.9% 


1.4% 


100.0% 


District 21A-D 
















Forsyth 


39 


83 


388 


128 


62 


49 


749 


% of Total 


5.2% 


11.1% 


51.8% 


17.1% 


8.3% 


6.5% 


100.0% 


District 22 
















Alexander 


1 


3 


16 


7 


2 


2 


31 


Davidson 


12 


34 


99 


15 


13 


1 


174 


Davie 


1 


20 


27 


1 


1 


1 


51 


Iredell 


9 


15 


108 


41 


11 


16 


200 


District Totals 


23 


72 


250 


64 


27 


20 


456 


% of Total 


5.0% 


15.8% 


54.8% 


14.0% 


5.9% 


4.4% 


100.0% 


District 23 
















Alleghany 


2 


4 


5 


6 








17 


Ashe 





6 


17 


5 





7 


35 


Wilkes 


10 


30 


74 


11 


7 


4 


136 


Yadkin 


4 


3 


10 


12 


1 


1 


31 


District Totals 


16 


43 


106 


34 


8 


12 


219 


% of Total 


7.3% 


19.6% 


48.4% 


15.5% 


3.7% 


5.5% 


100.0% 


District 24 
















Avery 


3 


4 


28 


7 


1 


4 


47 


Madison 


3 


1 


18 


12 


1 


3 


38 


Mitchell 





6 


16 


6 


2 


1 


31 


Watauga 


2 


11 


55 


18 


12 


6 


104 


Yancey 


2 


3 


7 


3 


1 


2 


18 


District Totals 


10 


25 


124 


46 


17 


16 


238 


% of Total 


4.2% 


10.5% 


52.1% 


19.3% 


7.1% 


6.7% 


100.0% 



99 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF 
CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Judge's 
Final Order 



District 25A 

Burke 

Caldwell 


Trial 
Jury 

10 
8 


by 

Judge 

38 

7 


Voluntary 
Dismissal 

79 
82 


or Judgment 
without Trial 

15 
48 


Clerk 

5 
12 


Other 

2 

1 


Total 
Dispositions 

149 
158 


District Totals 
% of Total 


18 
5.9% 


45 
14.7% 


161 

52.4% 


63 

20.5% 


17 
5.5% 


3 
1.0% 


307 
100.0% 


District 25B 

Catawba 

% of Total 


10 
3.5% 


30 
10.6% 


154 
54.4% 


57 
20.1% 


28 
9.9% 


4 
1.4% 


283 
100.0% 


District 26A-C 

Mecklenburg 
% of Total 


111 

4.8% 


162 

7.0% 


1,464 
63.1% 


356 

15.4% 


209 

9.0% 


17 
0.7% 


2,319 
100.0% 


District 27A 
Gaston 

% of Total 


48 
8.4% 


84 
14.7% 


353 
61.7% 


55 
9.6% 


17 
3.0% 


15 
2.6% 


572 
100.0% 


District 27B 

Cleveland 
Lincoln 


8 
3 


14 
11 


62 
33 


17 
14 


7 
2 


4 



112 
63 


District Totals 
% of Total 


11 
6.3% 


25 
14.3% 


95 
54.3% 


31 
17.7% 


9 
5.1% 


4 
2.3% 


175 
100.0% 


District 28 

Buncombe 
% of Total 


32 
6.5% 


63 
12.8% 


239 
48.6% 


118 
24.0% 


24 
4.9% 


16 
3.3% 


492 
100.0% 


District 29 

Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 


8 
3 

4 
5 


25 
12 

1 
26 

5 


69 

30 

9 

26 
31 


39 

1 

2 

12 

7 


6 
1 


5 
3 


17 

5 
5 
2 
4 


164 

52 
17 
75 
55 


District Totals 
% of Total 


20 
5.5% 


69 
19.0% 


165 

45.5% 


61 
16.8% 


15 
4.1% 


33 
9.1% 


363 

100.0% 


DLstrlct 30A 

Cherokee 
Clay 
Graham 
Macon 

Swain 


1 
3 
1 
1 
2 


6 

3 

12 
2 


14 

6 

10 

28 
9 


6 
3 

2 
13 

5 


1 



6 





1 


3 

1 


28 
13 
16 
63 
19 


District Totals 
% of Total 


8 

5.8% 


23 
16.5% 


67 
48.2% 


29 
20.9% 


7 
5.0% 


5 
3.6% 


139 
100.0% 



100 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF 

CIVIL CASES IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Judge's 
Final Order 





Trial by 


Voluntary 


or Judgment 






Total 




Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 


Dispositions 


District 30B 
















Haywood 


8 


21 


66 


20 


8 


6 


129 


Jackson 


7 


13 


21 


11 


1 


7 


60 


District Totals 


15 


34 


87 


31 


9 


13 


189 


% of Total 


7.9% 


18.0% 


46.0% 


16.4% 


4.8% 


6.9% 


100.0% 


State Totals 


840 


2,027 


9,289 


2,718 


1,169 


610 


16,653 


% of Total 


5.0% 


12.2% 


55.8% 


16.3% 


7.0% 


3.7% 


100.0% 



101 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 







Ages c 


»f Pending 


! Cases (Monl 


hs) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 




<12 


% 


12-24 


% 


>24 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 1 




















Camden 


4 


44.4% 


2 


22.2% 


3 


33.3% 


9 


509.2 


424.0 


Chowan 


16 


55.2% 


6 


20.7% 


7 


24.1% 


29 


462.3 


270.0 


Currituck 


30 


45.5% 


31 


47.0% 


5 


7.6% 


66 


384.3 


401.5 


Dare 


o? 


65.0% 


36 


25.2% 


14 


9.8% 


143 


314.3 


219.0 


Gates 


9 


69.2% 


3 


23.1% 


1 


7.7% 


13 


368.5 


214.0 


Pasquotank 


50 


67.6% 


18 


24.3% 


6 


8.1% 


74 


299.5 


225.5 


Perquimans 


17 


56.7% 


12 


40.0% 


1 


3.3% 


30 


317.6 


273.5 


District Totals 


219 


60.2% 


108 


29.7% 


37 


10.2% 


364 


342.8 


247.0 


District 2 




















Beaufort 


41 


68.3% 


15 


25.0% 


4 


6.7% 


60 


326.9 


190.0 


Hyde 


10 


50.0% 


7 


35.0% 


3 


15.0% 


20 


561.4 


346.5 


Martin 


25 


61.0% 


10 


24.4% 


6 


14.6% 


41 


436.7 


242.0 


Tyrrell 


4 


80.0% 





0.0% 


1 


20.0% 


5 


433.8 


94.0 


Washington 


22 


75.9% 


5 


17.2% 


2 


6.9% 


29 


245.1 


114.0 


District Totals 


102 


65.8% 


37 


23.9% 


16 


10.3% 


155 


374.4 


190.0 


District 3A 




















Pitt 


184 


76.3% 


40 


16.6% 


17 


7.1% 


241 


265.7 


192.0 


District 3B 




















Carteret 


110 


62.9% 


50 


28.6% 


15 


8.6% 


175 


316.3 


254.0 


Craven 


151 


66.2% 


64 


28.1% 


13 


5.7% 


228 


289.4 


228.5 


Pamlico 


13 


65.0% 


5 


25.0% 


2 


10.0% 


20 


332.7 


274.0 


District Totals 


274 


64.8% 


119 


28.1% 


30 


7.1% 


423 


302.6 


241.0 


District 4A 




















Duplin 


62 


61.4% 


27 


26.7% 


12 


11.9% 


101 


348.3 


270.0 


Jones 


7 


35.0% 


8 


40.0% 


5 


25.0% 


20 


892.5 


378.0 


Sampson 


46 


76.7% 


10 


16.7% 


4 


6.7% 


60 


268.0 


150.5 


District Totals 


115 


63.5% 


45 


24.9% 


21 


1 1 .6% 


181 


381.8 


261.0 


District 4B 




















Onslow 


230 


56.7% 


122 


30.0% 


54 


13.3% 


406 


376.8 


310.0 


District 5 




















New Hanover 


328 


62.6% 


149 


28.4% 


47 


9.0% 


524 


330.9 


276.5 


Pender 


31 


52.5% 


24 


40.7% 


4 


6.8% 


59 


335.1 


308.0 


District Totals 


359 


61.6% 


173 


29.7% 


51 


8.7% 


583 


331.3 


281.0 


District 6A 




















Halifax 


53 


57.0% 


34 


36.6% 


6 


6.5% 


93 


342.8 


305.0 



102 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 








Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 


Total 
Pending 

23 
47 
21 


Mean 
Age (Days) 

434.4 
255.6 
326.7 


Median 


District 6B 

Bertie 
Hertford 

Northampton 


<12 

14 
33 

14 


% 

60.9% 
70.2% 
66.7% 


12-24 

6 

14 
4 


% 

26.1% 
29.8% 
19.0% 


>24 

3 

3 


% 

13.0% 

0.0% 

14.3% 


Age (Days) 

252.0 
204.0 
249.0 


District Totals 


61 


67.0% 


24 


26.4% 


6 


6.6% 


91 


317.2 


214.0 


District 7A 

Nash 


113 


72.4% 


33 


21.2% 


10 


6.4% 


156 


265.7 


164.5 


District 7B-C 

Edgecombe 
Wilson 


77 
93 


75.5% 
71.0% 


21 

27 


20.6% 
20.6% 


4 
11 


3.9% 
8.4% 


102 
131 


253.5 
297.0 


191.5 
233.0 


District Totals 


170 


73.0% 


48 


20.6% 


15 


6.4% 


233 


277.9 


219.0 


District 8A 

Greene 

Lenoir 


14 
128 


53.8% 
76.2% 


9 
34 


34.6% 
20.2% 


3 
6 


11.5% 
3.6% 


26 
168 


432.2 
243.0 


333.0 
172.0 


District Totals 


142 


73.2% 


43 


22.2% 


9 


4.6% 


194 


268.3 


194.5 


District 8B 

Wayne 


183 


70.4% 


52 


20.0% 


25 


9.6% 


260 


315.0 


247.5 


District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 


53 
43 
36 
68 
33 


76.8% 
66.2% 
66.7% 
73.1% 
71.7% 


14 
18 
15 
19 
10 


20.3% 
27.7% 
27.8% 
20.4% 
21.7% 


2 
4 
3 
6 
3 


2.9% 
6.2% 
5.6% 
6.5% 
6.5% 


69 
65 
54 
93 
46 


234.9 
268.9 
301.4 
259.1 
307.1 


178.0 
156.0 
267.5 
136.0 
173.0 


District Totals 


233 


71.3% 


76 


23.2% 


18 


5.5% 


327 


269.7 


185.0 


District 10A-D 

Wake 


1,203 


65.1% 


499 


27.0% 


145 


7.9% 


1,847 


309.4 


235.0 


District 11 

Harnett 

Johnston 

Lee 


108 

162 

64 


75.5% 
65.9% 
80.0% 


29 
66 
13 


20.3% 
26.8% 
16.3% 


6 

18 

3 


4.2% 
7.3% 
3.8% 


143 

246 

80 


258.1 
302.9 
230.7 


197.0 
264.5 
190.0 


District Totals 


334 


71.2% 


108 


23.0% 


27 


5.8% 


469 


276.9 


234.0 


District 12A-C 

Cumberland 


340 


81.9% 


64 


15.4% 


11 


2.7% 


415 


225.5 


164.0 


District 13 

Bladen 

Brunswick 

Columbus 


36 
78 
90 


75.0% 
60.5% 
50.8% 


12 
40 
49 


25.0% 
31.0% 
27.7% 



11 
38 


0.0% 

8.5% 
21.5% 


48 
129 
177 


249.3 
327.9 
439.4 


207.5 
273.0 
358.0 


District Totals 


204 


57.6% 


101 


28.5% 


49 


13.8% 


354 


373.0 


301.5 



103 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 








Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 


Total 
Pending 

571 


Mean 

Age (Days) 

263.6 


Median 


District 14A-B 

Durham 


<12 

421 


% 
73.7% 


12-24 
116 


% 
20.3% 


>24 

34 


% 
6.0% 


Age (Days) 
175.0 


District 15A 

Alamance 


144 


76.6% 


36 


19.1% 


8 


4.3% 


188 


236.9 


176.5 


District 15B 

Chatham 
Orange 


38 
132 


76.0% 
75.4% 


12 
38 


24.0% 
21.7% 



5 


0.0% 

2.9% 


50 
175 


230.4 
241.7 


205.0 
198.0 


District Totals 


170 


75.6% 


50 


22.2% 


5 


2.2% 


225 


239.2 


204.0 


District 16A 

Hoke 
Scotland 


12 
35 


92.3% 
60.3% 


1 
20 


7.7% 
34.5% 



3 


0.0% 

5.2% 


13 
58 


188.9 
344.0 


197.0 

277.5 


District Totals 


47 


66.2% 


21 


29.6% 


3 


4.2% 


71 


315.6 


240.0 


District 16B 

Robeson 


217 


73.8% 


64 


21.8% 


13 


4.4% 


294 


271.4 


219.5 


District 17A 
Caswell 

Rockingham 


12 
67 


70.6% 
79.8% 


4 
14 


23.5% 
16.7% 


1 

3 


5.9% 
3.6% 


17 
84 


300.0 

247.7 


232.0 
195.0 


District Totals 


79 


78.2% 


18 


17.8% 


4 


4.0% 


101 


256.5 


211.0 


District 17B 

Stokes 
Surry 


6 
88 


85.7% 
93.6% 


1 
6 


14.3% 
6.4% 







0.0% 
0.0% 


7 
94 


197.9 
149.2 


240.0 
110.5 


District Totals 


94 


93.1% 


7 


6.9% 





0.0% 


101 


152.6 


116.0 


District 18A-E 

Guilford 


830 


78.9% 


199 


18.9% 


23 


2.2% 


1,052 


229.7 


177.0 


District 19A 

Cabarrus 


139 


82.7% 


27 


16.1% 


2 


1.2% 


168 


231.9 


211.5 


District 19B 

Montgomery 
Randolph 


19 
99 


61.3% 
78.6% 


9 
26 


29.0% 
20.6% 


3 

1 


9.7% 
0.8% 


31 
126 


309.2 
242.1 


205.0 
208.0 


District Totals 


118 


75.2% 


35 


22.3% 


4 


2.5% 


157 


255.3 


205.0 


District 19C 

Rowan 


137 


84.6% 


25 


15.4% 





0.0% 


162 


209.3 


175.0 


DLstrict 20A 

Anson 
Mcx>re 
Richmond 


37 
90 

70 


82.2% 
72.0% 
70.7% 


7 

29 

24 


15.6% 
23.2% 
24.2% 


1 

6 

5 


2.2% 
4.8% 
5.1% 


45 

125 

99 


207.3 
283.3 
310.9 


141.0 
182.0 
207.0 


District Totals 


197 


73.2% 


60 


22.3% 


12 


4.5% 


269 


280.8 


182.0 



104 



AG] 


:SOF 


CIVIL 


CASES 


PENDINC 


J IN THE SUP 


ERIOF 


I COURTS 










Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 












Ag 


es of Pending Cases (Months) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 

Age (Days) 


Median 




<12 


% 


12-24 


% 


>24 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 20B 




















Stanly 


48 


48.5% 


21 


21.2% 


30 


30.3% 


99 


703.3 


410.0 


Union 


141 


70.5% 


45 


22.5% 


14 


7.0% 


200 


302.9 


242.0 


District Totals 


189 


63.2% 


66 


22.1% 


44 


14.7% 


299 


435.5 


273.0 


District 21A-D 




















Forsyth 


597 


82.8% 


117 


16.2% 


7 


1.0% 


721 


214.2 


175.0 


District 22 




















Alexander 


34 


91.9% 


3 


8.1% 





0.0% 


37 


173.5 


168.0 


Davidson 


117 


85.4% 


20 


14.6% 





0.0% 


137 


191.8 


158.0 


Davie 


27 


81.8% 


6 


18.2% 





0.0% 


33 


187.5 


147.0 


Iredell 


136 


85.0% 


20 


12.5% 


4 


2.5% 


160 


207.0 


164.5 


District Totals 


314 


85.6% 


49 


13.4% 


4 


1.1% 


367 


196.2 


158.0 


District 23 




















Alleghany 


8 


72.7% 


2 


18.2% 


1 


9.1% 


11 


254.2 


255.0 


Ashe 


16 


88.9% 


2 


11.1% 





0.0% 


18 


173.4 


116.5 


Wilkes 


121 


74.7% 


37 


22.8% 


4 


2.5% 


162 


248.9 


213.0 


Yadkin 


30 


78.9% 


7 


18.4% 


1 


2.6% 


38 


218.8 


142.5 


District Totals 


175 


76.4% 


48 


21.0% 


6 


2.6% 


229 


238.2 


205.0 


District 24 




















Avery 


26 


78.8% 


6 


18.2% 


1 


3.0% 


33 


245.9 


214.0 


Madison 


29 


80.6% 


5 


13.9% 


2 


5.6% 


36 


243.8 


167.0 


Mitchell 


19 


79.2% 


4 


16.7% 


1 


4.2% 


24 


234.0 


164.5 


Watauga 


71 


78.9% 


17 


18.9% 


2 


2.2% 


90 


252.6 


204.0 


Yancey 


13 


68.4% 


5 


26.3% 


1 


5.3% 


19 


313.2 


227.0 


District Totals 


158 


78.2% 


37 


18.3% 


7 


3.5% 


202 


253.4 


201.5 


District 25A 




















Burke 


116 


81.7% 


22 


15.5% 


4 


2.8% 


142 


226.9 


177.0 


Caldwell 


121 


69.5% 


43 


24.7% 


10 


5.7% 


174 


285.9 


236.5 


District Totals 


237 


75.0% 


65 


20.6% 


14 


4.4% 


316 


259.4 


203.0 


District 25B 




















Catawba 


220 


81.5% 


41 


15.2% 


9 


3.3% 


270 


214.3 


153.0 


District 26 AC 




















Mecklenburg 


1,793 


64.7% 


749 


27.0% 


230 


8.3% 


2,772 


348.2 


254.0 


District 27A 




















Gaston 


319 


80.2% 


67 


16.8% 


12 


3.0% 


398 


216.9 


166.0 


District 27 B 




















Cleveland 


95 


65.5% 


42 


29.0% 


8 


5.5% 


145 


283.8 


204.0 


Lincoln 


73 


78.5% 


20 


21.5% 





0.0% 


93 


222.3 


185.0 


District Totals 


168 


70.6% 


62 


26.1% 


8 


3.4% 


238 


259.8 


203.0 



105 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 







Ages 


of Pending Cases (Months) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 

Age (Days) 


Median 




<12 


% 


12-24 


% 


>24 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 28 




















Buncombe 


323 


80.8% 


64 


16.0% 


13 


3.3% 


400 


232.7 


182.5 


District 29 




















Henderson 


110 


53.1% 


84 


40.6% 


13 


6.3% 


207 


347.3 


312.0 


McDowell 


34 


63.0% 


13 


24.1% 


7 


13.0% 


54 


363.4 


263.5 


Polk 


10 


66.7% 


3 


20.0% 


2 


13.3% 


15 


320.9 


227.0 


Rutherford 


40 


71.0% 


18 


26.1% 


2 


2.9% 


69 


266.1 


221.0 


Transylvania 


2S 


56.0% 


16 


32.0% 


6 


12.0% 


50 


399.0 


291.5 


District Totals 


231 


58.5% 


134 


33.9% 


30 


7.6% 


395 


340.9 


283.0 


District 30A 




















Cherokee 


26 


81.3% 


5 


15.6% 


1 


3.1% 


32 


250.6 


215.5 


Clay 


9 


75.0% 


3 


25.0% 





0.0% 


12 


286.8 


226.5 


Graham 


10 


58.8% 


2 


11.8% 


5 


29.4% 


17 


465.1 


330.0 


Macon 


46 


62.2% 


12 


16.2% 


16 


21.6% 


74 


443.7 


240.5 


Swain 


9 


40.9% 


10 


45.5% 


3 


13.6% 


22 


460.1 


397.5 


District Totals 


100 


63.7% 


32 


20.4% 


25 


15.9% 


157 


397.0 


284.0 


District 30B 




















Haywood 


83 


73.5% 


25 


22.1% 


5 


4.4% 


113 


264.5 


170.0 


Jackson 


32 


68.1% 


13 


27.7% 


2 


4.3% 


47 


297.2 


225.0 


District Totals 


115 


71.9% 


38 


23.8% 


7 


4.4% 


160 


274.1 


190.0 


State Totals 


12,051 


70.6% 


3,953 


23.2% 


1,071 


6.3% 


17,075 


291.5 


219.0 



106 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 
Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 to June 30, 1989 







Ages 


of Disposed Cases (Months) 


% 


Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 




<12 


% 


12-24 


% 


>24 


Age (Days) 


District 1 




















Camden 


4 


44.4% 


5 


55.6% 





0.0% 


9 


373.1 


393.0 


Chowan 


17 


73.9% 


5 


21.7% 


1 


4.3% 


23 


301.0 


288.0 


Currituck 


36 


63.2% 


15 


26.3% 


6 


10.5% 


57 


354.0 


299.0 


Dare 


93 


72.1% 


23 


17.8% 


13 


10.1% 


129 


282.6 


174.0 


Gates 


9 


90.0% 


1 


10.0% 





0.0% 


10 


196.0 


189.0 


Pasquotank 


39 


66.1% 


13 


22.0% 


7 


11.9% 


59 


297.3 


169.0 


Perquimans 


6 


60.0% 


3 


30.0% 


1 


10.0% 


10 


368.7 


297.5 


District Totals 


204 


68.7% 


65 


21.9% 


28 


9.4% 


297 


303.4 


230.0 


District 2 




















Beaufort 


46 


61.3% 


11 


14.7% 


18 


24.0% 


75 


443.2 


285.0 


Hyde 


9 


52.9% 


4 


23.5% 


4 


23.5% 


17 


488.4 


332.0 


Martin 


27 


62.8% 


5 


11.6% 


11 


25.6% 


43 


464.1 


277.0 


Tyrrell 


3 


37.5% 


1 


12.5% 


4 


50.0% 


8 


719.6 


711.0 


Washington 


20 


58.8% 


7 


20.6% 


7 


20.6% 


34 


387.3 


287.0 


District Totals 


105 


59.3% 


28 


15.8% 


44 


24.9% 


177 


454.4 


285.0 


District 3A 




















Pitt 


246 


70.7% 


69 


19.8% 


33 


9.5% 


348 


328.2 


190.5 


District 3B 




















Carteret 


107 


51.0% 


75 


35.7% 


28 


13.3% 


210 


388.5 


342.0 


Craven 


133 


58.6% 


58 


25.6% 


36 


15.9% 


227 


367.0 


293.0 


Pamlico 


12 


66.7% 


5 


27.8% 


1 


5.6% 


18 


291.2 


258.5 


District Totals 


252 


55.4% 


138 


30.3% 


65 


14.3% 


455 


373.9 


313.0 


District 4 A 




















Duplin 


41 


53.2% 


16 


20.8% 


20 


26.0% 


77 


442.8 


349.0 


Jones 


6 


40.0% 


8 


53.3% 


1 


6.7% 


15 


436.0 


371.0 


Sampson 


31 


57.4% 


16 


29.6% 


7 


13.0% 


54 


374.3 


311.5 


District Totals 


78 


53.4% 


40 


27.4% 


28 


19.2% 


146 


416.8 


351.5 


District 4B 




















Onslow 


153 


46.5% 


118 


35.9% 


58 


17.6% 


329 


481.5 


404.0 

i 


District 5 




















New Hanover 


237 


57.2% 


104 


25.1% 


73 


17.6% 


414 


379.8 


306.5 


Pender 


16 


35.6% 


22 


48.9% 


7 


15.6% 


45 


440.4 


456.0 


District Totals 


253 


55.1% 


126 


27.5% 


80 


17.4% 


459 


385.7 


315.0 


District 6A 




















Halifax 


56 


62.2% 


26 


28.9% 


8 


8.9% 


90 


358.3 


297.5 



107 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 








Ages of Cases Disposed July 


1, 1988 to June 30, 1989 










Ages 


of Disposed Cases (Months) 


% 


Total 
Disposed 


Mean 

Age (Days) 


Median 




<12 


% 


12-24 


% 


>24 


Age (Days) 


District 6B 




















Bertie 


19 


67.9% 


8 


28.6% 


1 


3.6% 


28 


256.8 


150.5 


Hertford 


24 


72.7% 


5 


15.2% 


4 


12.1% 


33 


355.4 


246.0 


Northampton 


13 


44.8% 


9 


31.0% 


7 


24.1% 


29 


532.8 


369.0 


District Totals 


56 


62.2% 


22 


24.4% 


12 


13.3% 


90 


381.9 


239.0 


District 7A 




















Nash 


111 


64.2% 


40 


23.1% 


22 


12.7% 


173 


364.1 


256.0 


District 7B-C 




















Edgecombe 


74 


66.1% 


31 


27.7% 


7 


6.3% 


112 


310.5 


287.5 


Wilson 


71 


61.2% 


27 


23.3% 


18 


15.5% 


116 


365.0 


263.0 


District Totals 


145 


63.6% 


58 


25.4% 


25 


11.0% 


228 


338.2 


285.5 


District 8A 




















Greene 


14 


43.8% 


10 


31.3% 


8 


25.0% 


32 


471.5 


393.5 


Lenoir 


119 


61.7% 


51 


26.4% 


23 


11.9% 


193 


341.9 


290.0 


District Totals 


133 


59.1% 


61 


27.1% 


31 


13.8% 


225 


360.3 


300.0 


District 8B 




















Wayne 


160 


64.8% 


67 


27.1% 


20 


8.1% 


247 


323.4 


254.0 


District 9 




















Franklin 


29 


46.0% 


26 


41.3% 


8 


12.7% 


63 


425.7 


417.0 


Granville 


29 


61.7% 


11 


23.4% 


7 


14.9% 


47 


368.2 


259.0 


Person 


30 


57.7% 


14 


26.9% 


8 


15.4% 


52 


373.8 


333.0 


Vance 


46 


52.9% 


37 


42.5% 


4 


4.6% 


87 


350.9 


349.0 


Warren 


14 


42.4% 


15 


45.5% 


4 


12.1% 


33 


430.6 


385.0 


District Totals 


148 


52.5% 


103 


36.5% 


31 


1 1 .0% 


282 


384.0 


349.0 


District 10A-D 




















Wake 


891 


59.4% 


472 


31.5% 


136 


9.1% 


1,499 


337.6 


273.0 


District 11 




















Harnett 


82 


67.2% 


37 


30.3% 


3 


2.5% 


122 


283.3 


218.5 


Johnston 


91 


57.2% 


51 


32.1% 


17 


10.7% 


159 


352.5 


310.0 


Lee 


52 


63.4% 


27 


32.9% 


3 


3.7% 


82 


297.6 


254.5 


District Totals 


225 


62.0% 


115 


31.7% 


23 


6.3% 


363 


316.8 


263.0 


District 12A-C 




















Cumberland 


318 


53.7% 


213 


36.0% 


61 


10.3% 


592 


375.5 


333.0 


District 13 




















Bladen 


32 


76.2% 


10 


23.8% 





0.0% 


42 


249.4 


273.0 


Brunswick 


50 


41.0% 


38 


31.1% 


34 


27.9% 


122 


509.7 


449.0 


Columbus 


37 


39.4% 


33 


35.1% 


24 


25.5% 


94 


502.0 


456.0 


District Totals 


119 


46.1% 


81 


31.4% 


58 


22.5% 


258 


464.5 


396.0 



108 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES I 


HSPOSE1 


IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 








Ages of Cases Disposed July 


1, 1988 to June 30, 1989 










Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 


% 


Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 




<12 


% 


12-24 


% 


>24 


Age (Days) 


District 14A-B 




















Durham 


470 


63.9% 


178 


24.2% 


87 


11.8% 


735 


367.1 


244.0 


District ISA 




















Alamance 


98 


54.1% 


58 


32.0% 


25 


13.8% 


181 


367.1 


304.0 


District 15B 




















Chatham 


42 


82.4% 


9 


17.6% 





0.0% 


51 


190.2 


156.0 


Orange 


118 


61.8% 


69 


36.1% 


4 


2.1% 


191 


296.8 


291.0 


District Totals 


160 


66.1% 


78 


32.2% 


4 


1.7% 


242 


274.3 


268.5 


District 16A 




















Hoke 


11 


52.4% 


7 


33.3% 


3 


14.3% 


21 


427.8 


355.0 


Scotland 


42 


72.4% 


12 


20.7% 


4 


6.9% 


58 


304.3 


238.0 


District Totals 


53 


67.1% 


19 


24.1% 


7 


8.9% 


79 


337.1 


245.0 


District 16B 




















Robeson 


172 


63.9% 


87 


32.3% 


10 


3.7% 


269 


286.7 


284.0 


District 17A 




















Caswell 


15 


75.0% 


4 


20.0% 


1 


5.0% 


20 


303.8 


288.5 


Rockingham 


104 


72.2% 


36 


25.0% 


4 


2.8% 


144 


263.2 


237.5 


District Totals 


119 


72.6% 


40 


24.4% 


5 


3.0% 


164 


268.1 


255.0 


District 17B 




















Stokes 


20 


71.4% 


7 


25.0% 


1 


3.6% 


28 


262.3 


241.5 


Surry 


85 


81.0% 


20 


19.0% 





0.0% 


105 


242.8 


253.0 


District Totals 


105 


78.9% 


27 


20.3% 


1 


0.8% 


133 


246.9 


252.0 


District 18A-E 




















Guilford 


706 


62.9% 


382 


34.0% 


35 


3.1% 


1,123 


300.3 


287.0 


District 19A 




















Cabarrus 


98 


57.0% 


67 


39.0% 


7 


4.1% 


172 


331.9 


309.0 


District 19B 




















Montgomery 


19 


67.9% 


8 


28.6% 


1 


3.6% 


28 


304.8 


258.0 


Randolph 


86 


59.7% 


54 


37.5% 


4 


2.8% 


144 


313.5 


315.5 


District Totals 


105 


61.0% 


62 


36.0% 


5 


2.9% 


172 


312.0 


314.0 


District 19C 




















Rowan 


113 


67.7% 


52 


31.1% 


2 


1.2% 


167 


292.1 


299.0 


District 20A 




















Anson 


27 


55.1% 


19 


38.8% 


3 


6.1% 


49 


353.6 


268.0 


Moore 


73 


62.9% 


29 


25.0% 


14 


12.1% 


116 


353.8 


294.0 


Richmond 


38 


54.3% 


24 


34.3% 


8 


1 1 .4% 


70 


381.7 


356.0 


District Totals 


138 


58.7% 


72 


30.6% 


25 


10.6% 


235 


362.1 


306.0 



109 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 








Ages of Cases Disposed July 


1, 1988 to June 


30, 1989 










Ages 


of Disposed 


Cases (Months) 


% 


Total 
Disposed 


Mean 

Age (Days) 


Median 




<12 


% 


12-24 


% 


>24 


Age (Days) 


District 20B 




















Stanly 


32 


52.5% 


23 


37.7% 


6 


9.8% 


61 


379.5 


344.0 


Union 


-!4 


46.0% 


65 


40.4% 


22 


13.7% 


161 


425.2 


390.0 


District Totals 


106 


47.7% 


88 


39.6% 


28 


12.6% 


222 


412.7 


383.0 


District 21A-D 




















Forsyth 


523 


69.8% 


210 


28.0% 


16 


2.1% 


749 


287.9 


273.0 


District 22 




















Alexander 


21 


67.7% 


10 


32.3% 





0.0% 


31 


291.4 


271.0 


Davidson 


115 


66.1% 


54 


31.0% 


5 


2.9% 


174 


290.3 


279.0 


Davie 


36 


70.6% 


14 


27.5% 


1 


2.0% 


51 


287.4 


244.0 


Iredell 


136 


68.0% 


55 


27.5% 


9 


4.5% 


200 


290.7 


265.5 


District Totals 


308 


67.5% 


133 


29.2% 


15 


3.3% 


456 


290.3 


271.0 


District 23 




















Alleghany 


10 


58.8% 


4 


23.5% 


3 


17.6% 


17 


339.1 


294.0 


Ashe 


18 


51.4% 


17 


48.6% 





0.0% 


35 


327.0 


327.0 


Wilkes 


74 


54.4% 


55 


40.4% 


7 


5.1% 


136 


345.5 


346.0 


Yadkin 


16 


51.6% 


15 


48.4% 





0.0% 


31 


367.2 


343.0 


District Totals 


118 


53.9% 


91 


41.6% 


10 


4.6% 


219 


345.1 


343.0 


District 24 




















Avery 


29 


61.7% 


17 


36.2% 


1 


2.1% 


47 


316.3 


282.0 


Madison 


9 


23.7% 


15 


39.5% 


14 


36.8% 


38 


614.3 


577.0 


Mitchell 


23 


74.2% 


6 


19.4% 


2 


6.5% 


31 


287.5 


235.0 


Watauga 


66 


63.5% 


35 


33.7% 


3 


2.9% 


104 


298.3 


276.5 


Yancey 


10 


55.6% 


8 


44.4% 





0.0% 


18 


336.1 


360.0 


District Totals 


137 


57.6% 


81 


34.0% 


20 


8.4% 


238 


353.8 


314.5 


District 2SA 




















Burke 


102 


68.5% 


42 


28.2% 


5 


3.4% 


149 


279.3 


259.0 


Caldwell 


77 


48.7% 


67 


42.4% 


14 


8.9% 


158 


385.9 


374.5 


District Totals 


179 


58.3% 


109 


35.5% 


19 


6.2% 


307 


334.1 


315.0 


District 25B 




















Catawba 


204 


72.1% 


65 


23.0% 


14 


4.9% 


283 


265.7 


224.0 


District 26A-C 




















Mecklenburg 


1,156 


49.8% 


1,032 


44.5% 


131 


5.6% 


2,319 


376.1 


369.0 


DLstrlct 27A 




















Gaston 


409 


71.5% 


138 


24.1% 


25 


4.4% 


572 


283.3 


260.5 


DLstrlct 27B 




















Cleveland 


53 


47.3% 


48 


42.9% 


11 


9.8% 


112 


368.1 


383.5 


Lincoln 


42 


66.7% 


20 


31.7% 


1 


1.6% 


63 


265.4 


290.0 


District Totals 


95 


54.3% 


68 


38.9% 


12 


6.9% 


175 


331.1 


335.0 



AGES OF CIVIL CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 to June 30, 1989 



Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



Total 





<12 


% 


12-24 


% 


>24 


% 


Dispose 


District 28 
















Buncombe 


373 


75.8% 


100 


20.3% 


19 


3.9% 


492 


District 29 
















Henderson 


72 


43.9% 


70 


42.7% 


22 


13.4% 


164 


McDowell 


23 


44.2% 


23 


44.2% 


6 


1 1 .5% 


52 


Polk 


11 


64.7% 


3 


17.6% 


3 


17.6% 


17 


Rutherford 


25 


33.3% 


39 


52.0% 


11 


14.7% 


75 


Transylvania 


21 


38.2% 


24 


43.6% 


10 


18.2% 


55 


District Totals 


152 


41.9% 


159 


43.8% 


52 


14.3% 


363 


District 30A 
















Cherokee 


16 


57.1% 


8 


28.6% 


4 


14.3% 


28 


Clay 


6 


46.2% 


4 


30.8% 


3 


23.1% 


13 


Graham 


10 


62.5% 


3 


18.8% 


3 


18.8% 


16 


Macon 


25 


39.7% 


21 


33.3% 


17 


27.0% 


63 


Swain 


7 


36.8% 


6 


31.6% 


6 


31.6% 


19 


District Totals 


64 


46.0% 


42 


30.2% 


33 


23.7% 


139 



Mean 

Age (Days) 

274.5 



416.5 
425.9 
336.3 
467.8 
462.6 

431.7 



380.1 
431.2 
337.4 
612.1 
545.9 

507.8 



Median 

Age (Days) 

235.5 



432.0 
433.0 
161.0 
433.0 
458.0 

433.0 



343.5 
438.0 
138.5 
489.0 
478.0 

434.0 



District 30B 

Haywood 62 

Jackson 16 

District Totals 78 

State Totals 9,892 



48.1% 


44 


34.1% 


23 


17.8% 


129 


26.7% 


29 


48.3% 


15 


25.0% 


60 


41.3% 


73 


38.6% 


38 


20.1% 


189 


59.4% 


5,353 


32.1% 


1,408 


8.5% 


16,653 



461.4 
618.6 

511.3 

347.3 



378.0 
524.0 

421.0 

297.0 






111 



CASELOAD TRENDS IN ESTATES AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS 

1979-80 — 1988-89 
ESTATE CASES 



N 

I 

M 
B 
E 

R 


F 

C 

A 
S 
E 
S 




50,000 



25,000 



79-80 



80-81 



11-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 87- 




89 



SPECIAL PROCEEDING CASES 



N 
U 

M 
B 

E 

R 


F 

C 

A 
S 
E 

S 




50,000 



25,000 



79-80 



80-81 



11-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 87-1 







88-89 



Filings of estates and special proceedings continued to increase 
in 1988-89. Estate filings grew by 4.4% and estate dispositions 



by 3.1%. Special proceeding filings increased by 10.8% and 
dispositions by 8.6%. 



112 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS FOR ESTATES 

AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CLERKS 

OF SUPERIOR COURT 





July 


1,1988 -June 30, 1989 










Estates 


Special Proceedings 




Filed 


Disposed 


Filed 


Disposed 


District 1 










Camden 


64 


56 


20 


16 


Chowan 


191 


147 


49 


47 


Currituck 


176 


154 


86 


55 


Dare 


190 


251 


165 


125 


Gates 


109 


62 


46 


10 


Pasquotank 


250 


254 


231 


116 


Perquimans 


121 


106 


48 


29 


District Totals 


1,101 


1,030 


645 


398 


District 2 










Beaufort 


437 


457 


303 


284 


Hyde 


72 


100 


34 


24 


Martin 


226 


214 


153 


113 


Tyrrell 


55 


40 


21 


9 


Washington 


116 


114 


59 


64 


District Totals 


906 


925 


570 


494 


District 3A 










Pitt 


604 


643 


519 


329 


District 3B 










Carteret 


486 


468 


280 


157 


Craven 


468 


475 


548 


506 


Pamlico 


78 


77 


26 


22 


District Totals 


1,032 


1,020 


854 


685 


District 4A 










Duplin 


330 


339 


244 


177 


Jones 


92 


50 


45 


39 


Sampson 


463 


466 


291 


358 


District Totals 


885 


855 


580 


574 


District 4B 










Onslow 


414 


317 


1,429 


1,039 


District 5 










New Hanover 


878 


729 


1,324 


1,296 


Pender 


207 


210 


198 


153 


District Totals 


1,085 


939 


1,522 


1,449 


District 6 A 










Halifax 


459 


470 


352 


272 



113 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS FOR ESTATES 

AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CLERKS 

OF SUPERIOR COURT 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Estates Special Proceedings 





Filed 


Disposed 


Filed 


Disposed 


District 6B 










Bertie 


162 


123 


111 


42 


Hertford 


242 


200 


141 


105 


Northampton 


180 


198 


107 


87 


District Totals 


584 


521 


359 


234 


District 7A 










Nash 


545 


525 


439 


196 


District 7B-C 










Wilson 


539 


497 


414 


544 


Edgecombe 


504 


544 


372 


241 


District Totals 


1,043 


1,041 


786 


785 


District 8A 










Greene 


161 


156 


73 


49 


Lenoir 


515 


569 


341 


312 


District Totals 


676 


725 


414 


361 


District 8B 










Wayne 


756 


673 


913 


904 


District 9 










Franklin 


233 


177 


255 


111 


Granville 


267 


236 


322 


291 


Person 


265 


246 


152 


187 


Vance 


316 


305 


208 


168 


Warren 


192 


201 


101 


84 


District Totals 


1,273 


1,165 


1,038 


841 


District 10A-D 










Wake 


1,889 


1,669 


3,295 


3,250 


District 11 










Harnett 


460 


358 


422 


246 


Johnston 


582 


590 


681 


657 


Lee 


353 


317 


238 


112 


District Totals 


1,395 


1,265 


1,341 


1,015 


District 12A-C 










Cumberland 


1,058 


1,017 


2,349 


2,252 



114 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS FOR ESTATES 

AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CLERKS 

OF SUPERIOR COURT 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Estates Special Proceedings 





Filed 


Disposed 


Filed 


Disposed 


District 13 










Bladen 


235 


234 


203 


179 


Brunswick 


428 


419 


360 


295 


Columbus 


418 


427 


311 


288 


District Totals 


1,081 


1,080 


874 


762 


District 14A-B 










Durham 


1,293 


1,325 


1,999 


1,665 


District ISA 










Alamance 


876 


743 


773 


531 


District 15 B 










Chatham 


317 


327 


195 


163 


Orange 


460 


412 


681 


534 


District Totals 


777 


739 


876 


697 


District 16A 










Hoke 


91 


90 


99 


85 


Scotland 


254 


247 


384 


298 


District Totals 


345 


337 


483 


383 


District 16B 










Robeson 


661 


665 


751 


739 


District 17A 










Caswell 


150 


176 


158 


146 


Rockingham 


666 


694 


414 


334 


District Totals 


816 


870 


572 


480 


District 17B 










Stokes 


220 


209 


124 


80 


Surry 


464 


455 


358 


205 


District Totals 


684 


664 


482 


285 


District 18A-E 










Guilford 


2,333 


1,771 


2,930 


2,706 


District 19A 










Cabarrus 


735 


710 


437 


261 


District 19B 










Montgomery 


186 


177 


119 


46 


Randolph 


708 


634 


509 


511 


District Totals 


894 


811 


628 


557 



15 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS FOR ESTATES 

AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CLERKS 

OF SUPERIOR COURT 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Estates Special Proceedings 





Filed 


Disposed 


Filed 


Disposed 


District 19C 










Rowan 


988 


953 


973 


772 


District 20A 










Anson 


194 


141 


91 


37 


Moore 


603 


597 


422 


431 


Richmond 


366 


255 


354 


196 


District Totals 


1,163 


993 


867 


664 


District 20B 










Stanly 


482 


506 


259 


194 


Union 


448 


506 


346 


229 


District Totals 


930 


1,012 


605 


423 


District 21 AD 










Forsyth 


1,899 


2,110 


2,034 


1,968 


District 22 










Alexander 


172 


168 


120 


84 


Davidson 


841 


743 


575 


604 


Davie 


225 


222 


274 


107 


Iredell 


827 


790 


451 


480 


District Totals 


2,065 


1,923 


1,420 


1,275 


District 23 










Alleghany 


102 


61 


55 


43 


Ashe 


240 


228 


121 


105 


Wilkes 


312 


285 


403 


574 


Yadkin 


204 


195 


120 


97 


District Totals 


858 


769 


699 


819 


District 24 










Avery 


117 


91 


100 


103 


Madison 


119 


104 


62 


51 


Mitchell 


130 


67 


41 


37 


Watauga 


212 


210 


221 


190 


Yancey 


137 


75 


61 


37 


District Totals 


715 


547 


485 


418 


District 25 A 










Burke 


568 


565 


523 


392 


Caldwell 


523 


496 


430 


314 


District Totals 


1,091 


1,061 


953 


706 



116 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS FOR ESTATES 

AND SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CLERKS 

OF SUPERIOR COURT 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Estates Special Proceedings 





Filed 


Disposed 


District 25B 






Catawba 


838 


686 


District 26A-C 






Mecklenburg 


2,941 


3,024 


District 27 A 






Gaston 


1,356 


1,254 


District 27B 






Cleveland 


646 


641 


Lincoln 


348 


355 


District Totals 


994 


996 


District 28 






Buncombe 


1,623 


1,756 


District 29 






Henderson 


805 


740 


McDowell 


320 


268 


Polk 


194 


178 


Rutherford 


514 


456 


Transylvania 


259 


192 


District Totals 


2,092 


1,834 


District 30A 






Cherokee 


208 


191 


Clay 


56 


40 


Graham 


51 


30 


Macon 


259 


299 


Swain 


76 


87 


District Totals 


650 


647 


District 30B 






Haywood 


401 


403 


Jackson 


188 


126 


District Totals 


589 


529 


State Totals 


46,992 


44,609 



Filed 

571 

4,752 
850 



519 

197 

716 



1,279 



1,106 



500 



Disposed 

268 

5,592 
795 



320 
184 

504 



1,199 



396 


409 


266 


244 


67 


56 


271 


176 


106 


47 



932 



129 


121 


28 


13 


29 


18 


266 


243 


48 


43 



438 



235 


203 


150 


83 


385 


286 


,405 


41,203 



117 



CASELOAD TRENDS OF CRIMINAL CASES IN THE 
SUPERIOR COURTS 

1979-80 — 1988-89 



N 
U 

M 
B 
E 
R 



F 

C 

A 
S 
E 

S 




End Pending 



110,000 



55,000 



79-80 



80-81 



81-82 



82-83 



83-84 



84-85 



85-86 



86-87 



87-88 



88-89 



Accelerating the increasing trend of prior years, criminal filings 
in the superior courts grew by 13.1% in 1988-89, as compared 
to 1987-88. Criminal dispositions increased by 11.2%. The 



difference accounts for the 19.7% increase in the number of 
cases pending June 30, 1989 as compared to the beginning of 
the fiscal year. 



118 



FILINGS OF CRIMINAL CASES IN THE 
SUPERIOR COURTS — BY TYPE OF CASE 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 

Superior court criminal case filings totalled 100,587 cases, of which 62,752 were felonies, and 37,835 were misdemeanors, 
comprising the following specific types of cases: 

FELONIES 

Murder 
Manslaughter 
First Degree Rape 
Other Sex Offenses 
Robbery 
Assault 

Burglary/Breaking or Entering 
Larceny 

Arson & Burnings 
Forgery & Utterings 
Fraudulent Activity 
Controlled Substances 
Other* 
TOTAL 



Number Filed 


% of Total Filings 


589 


0.9% 


124 


0.2% 


1,500 


2.4% 


2,136 


3.4% 


2,519 


4.0% 


2,231 


3.6% 


12,626 


20.1% 


7,337 


11.7% 


461 


0.7% 


7,898 


12.6% 


5,996 


9.6% 


15,505 


24.7% 


3,830 


6.1% 


62,752 


100.0% 



MISDEMEANORS 

DWI Appeal 

Other Motor Vehicle Appeal 
Non-Motor Vehicle Appeal 
Misdemeanor Originating in Superior Court 
TOTAL 



6,470 
6,577 

20,130 
4,658 

37,835 



17.1% 
17.4% 
53.2% 
12.3% 
100.0% 



*"Other" felony cases include a wide variety of offenses that do 
not fit squarely into any of the offenses listed above, such as 
kidnapping, trespassing, crimes against public morality, perjury, 
and obstructing justice. However, since last year, several 



offenses have been reclassified from this category to the 
"Controlled Substances" category, the "Other Sex Offenses" 
category, and others. Therefore the percentages from last year 
and this year are not strictly comparable. 



119 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 











July 1, 1988 -- June 


30, 1989 


















Felonies 










Misdemeanors 








Begin 










End 


Begin 










Knd 




Pending 




Total 


i 


Jo Caseload 


Pending 


Pending 




Total 


< 


% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/88 


Filed Caseload Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


7/1/88 


Filed Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


District 1 


























Camden 


11 


2? 


34 


26 


76.5% 


8 


19 


70 


89 


75 


84.3% 


14 


Chowan 


46 


161 


207 


114 


55.1% 


93 


55 


246 


301 


195 


64.8% 


106 


Currituck 


20 


47 


67 


40 


59.7% 


27 


50 


166 


216 


174 


80.6% 


42 


Dare 


136 


337 


473 


381 


80.5% 


92 


184 


607 


791 


659 


83.3% 


132 


Gates 


20 


40 


60 


44 


73.3% 


16 


30 


90 


120 


100 


83.3% 


20 


Pasquotank 


62 


326 


388 


281 


72.4% 


107 


79 


638 


717 


579 


80.8% 


138 


Perquimans 


46 


105 


151 


84 


55.6% 


67 


39 


185 


224 


133 


59.4% 


91 


District Totals 


341 


1,039 


1,380 


970 


70.3% 


410 


456 


2,002 


2,458 


1,915 


77.9% 


543 


District 2 


























Beaufort 


79 


566 


645 


437 


67.8% 


208 


77 


448 


525 


438 


83.4% 


87 


Hyde 


34 


37 


71 


54 


76.1% 


17 


10 


39 


49 


31 


63.3% 


18 


Martin 


62 


124 


186 


152 


81.7% 


34 


24 


81 


105 


82 


78.1% 


23 


Tyrrell 


6 


25 


31 


28 


90.3% 


3 


5 


43 


48 


35 


72.9% 


13 


Washington 


43 


123 


166 


114 


68.7% 


52 


18 


79 


97 


73 


75.3% 


24 


District Totals 


224 


875 


1,099 


785 


71.4% 


314 


134 


690 


824 


659 


80.0% 


165 


District 3A 


























Pitt 


427 


2,288 


2,715 


2,090 


77.0% 


625 


361 


1,725 


2,086 


1,677 


80.4% 


409 


District 3B 


























Carteret 


59 


502 


561 


354 


63.1% 


207 


27 


281 


308 


196 


63.6% 


112 


Craven 


165 


801 


966 


736 


76.2% 


230 


72 


750 


822 


704 


85.6% 


118 


Pamlico 


24 


53 


77 


49 


63.6% 


28 


7 


34 


41 


27 


65.9% 


14 


District Totals 


248 


1,356 


1,604 


1,139 


71.0% 


465 


106 


1,065 


1,171 


927 


79.2% 


244 


District 4A 


























Duplin 


60 


462 


522 


445 


85.2% 


77 


6 


94 


100 


86 


86.0% 


14 


Jones 


6 


67 


73 


56 


76.7% 


17 


1 


18 


19 


8 


42.1% 


11 


Sampson 


170 


411 


581 


464 


79.9% 


117 


13 


104 


117 


102 


87.2% 


15 


District Totals 


236 


940 


1,176 


965 


82.1% 


211 


20 


216 


236 


196 


83.1% 


40 


District 4B 


























Onslow 


281 


1,443 


1,724 


1,519 


88.1% 


205 


76 


385 


461 


404 


87.6% 


57 


District 5 


























New Hanover 


576 


2,046 


2,622 


2,030 


77.4% 


592 


260 


1,216 


1,476 


1,186 


80.4% 


290 


Pender 


157 


913 


1,070 


306 


28.6% 


764 


43 


120 


163 


124 


76.1% 


39 


District Totals 


733 


2,959 


3,692 


2,336 


63.3% 


1,356 


303 


1,336 


1,639 


1,310 


79.9% 


329 


DLstrict 6A 


























Halifax 


100 


475 


575 


400 


69.6% 


175 


92 


238 


330 


218 


66.1% 


112 



120 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL CASES 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 









Felonies 










Misdemeanors 








Begin 










End 


Begin 










End 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 


Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/88 


Filed 


Caseload Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


7/1/88 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


District 6B 


























Bertie 


32 


109 


141 


109 


77.3% 


32 


31 


53 


84 


58 


69.0% 


26 


Hertford 


42 


155 


197 


146 


74.1% 


51 


24 


159 


183 


140 


76.5% 


43 


Northampton 


71 


251 


322 


172 


53.4% 


150 


47 


70 


117 


84 


71.8% 


33 


District Totals 


145 


515 


660 


427 


64.7% 


233 


102 


282 


384 


282 


73.4% 


102 


District 7A 

Nash 


109 


916 


1,025 


831 


81.1% 


194 


69 


442 


511 


417 


81.6% 


94 


District 7B-C 


























Edgecombe 


152 


679 


831 


638 


76.8% 


193 


71 


406 


477 


299 


62.7% 


178 


Wilson 


105 


939 


1,044 


819 


78.4% 


225 


74 


343 


417 


320 


76.7% 


97 



District Totals 257 1,618 1,875 1,457 



77.7% 



418 



145 



749 894 



619 



69.2% 



275 



District 8A 




















Greene 


21 


150 


171 


91 


53.2% 


80 


10 


51 


61 


Lenoir 


102 


467 


569 


477 


83.8% 


92 


86 


369 


455 



39 63.9% 
411 90.3% 



22 
44 



District Totals 123 



617 



740 



568 



76.8% 



172 



% 



420 516 



450 87.2% 



66 



District 8B 

Wayne 



178 



499 677 



545 



80.5% 



132 



166 



778 944 



709 75.1% 



235 



District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 



99 
103 
120 
241 

14 



321 
600 
308 
663 
139 



420 
703 
428 
904 
153 



332 
363 
276 
519 
90 



79.0% 
51.6% 
64.5% 
57.4% 
58.8% 



88 
340 
152 
385 

63 



134 
77 
88 

114 
60 



241 
185 
218 
501 
117 



375 
262 
306 
615 
177 



270 
185 
209 

377 

101 



72.0% 
70.6% 
68.3% 
61.3% 
57.1% 



105 

77 

97 

238 

76 



District Totals 577 2,031 2,608 1,580 60.6% 



1,028 



473 



1,262 1,735 1,142 



65. i 



593 



District 10A-10D 

Wake 



1,342 3,608 4,950 3,745 



75.7% 



1,205 



560 



2,267 2,827 2,176 



77.0% 



651 



District 11 

Harnett 54 

Johnston 67 

Lee 113 



568 


622 


478 


76.8% 


144 


15 


207 


222 


185 


83.3% 


37 


393 


460 


385 


83.7% 


75 


72 


417 


489 


443 


90.6% 


46 


394 


507 


436 


86.0% 


71 


35 


184 


219 


181 


82.6% 


38 



District Totals 234 1,355 1,589 1,299 



81.7% 



290 



122 



808 



930 



809 



87.0% 



121 



District 12A-12C 

Cumberland 688 



1,887 2,575 1,983 



77.0% 



592 



118 



387 



505 



419 



83.0% 



86 



121 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 - June 30, 1989 









Felonies 










Misdemeanors 








Begin 










Fnd 


Begin 










Knd 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 


Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/88 


Filed i 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


7/1/88 


Filed t 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


District 13 


























Bladen 


314 


127 


441 


387 


87.8% 


54 


23 


172 


195 


137 


70.3% 


58 


Brunswick 


636 


486 


1,122 


902 


80.4% 


220 


29 


145 


174 


155 


89.1% 


19 


Columbus 


133 


321 


454 


247 


54.4% 


207 


140 


227 


367 


265 


72.2% 


102 


District Totals 


1,083 


934 


2,017 


1,536 


76.2% 


481 


192 


544 


736 


557 


75.7% 


179 


District 14A-14B 


























Durham 


608 


1,995 


2,603 


1,617 


62.1% 


986 


187 


372 


559 


367 


65.7% 


192 


DLstrict 15A 


























Alamance 


212 


1,488 


1,700 


1,324 


77.9% 


376 


103 


724 


827 


676 


81.7% 


151 


District 15B 


























Chatham 


90 


293 


383 


278 


72.6% 


105 


37 


98 


135 


100 


74.1% 


35 


Orange 


229 


696 


925 


648 


70.1% 


277 


39 


139 


178 


137 


77.0% 


41 


District Totals 


319 


989 


1,308 


926 


70.8% 


382 


76 


237 


313 


237 


75.7% 


76 


District 16A 


























Hoke 


41 


133 


174 


131 


75.3% 


43 


15 


74 


89 


57 


64.0% 


32 


Scotland 


339 


370 


709 


575 


81.1% 


134 


255 


273 


528 


441 


83.5% 


87 



District Totals 380 



503 



883 



706 



80.0% 



177 



270 



347 617 



498 



80.7% 



119 



DLstrict 16B 




Robeson 


821 


DLstrict 17A 




Caswell 


31 


Rockingham 


324 



1,986 2,807 1,853 66. 



225 256 198 77.3% 

1,254 1,578 765 48.5% 



'54 


297 


918 


1,215 


764 


62.9% 


451 


58 


48 


219 


267 


225 


84.3% 


42 


113 


264 


874 


1,138 


768 


67.5% 


370 



District Totals 355 



1,479 1,834 963 52.5% 



871 



312 1,093 1,405 



993 



70.7% 



412 



DLstrict 17B 




Stokes 


71 


Surry 


195 



293 366 290 79.2% 76 

807 1,002 819 81.7% 183 



18 


201 


219 


133 


60.7% 


86 


74 


588 


662 


532 


80.4% 


130 



District Totals 268 



1,100 1,368 1,109 81.1% 259 



92 



789 



665 



75.5% 



216 



DLstrict 18A-18E 




















Guilford 


1,307 


4,309 


5,616 


3,906 


69.6% 


1,710 


135 


505 


640 


DLstrict 19A 




















Cabarrus 


275 


874 


1,149 


840 


73.1% 


309 


222 


699 


921 


DLstrict 19B 




















Montgomery 


55 


120 


175 


110 


62.9% 


65 


158 


226 


384 


Randolph 


387 


839 


1,226 


681 


55.5% 


545 


297 


902 


1,199 


District Totals 


442 


959 


1,401 


791 


56.5% 


610 


455 


1,128 


1,583 



498 77.8% 



674 73.2% 



308 80.2% 

918 76.6% 

,226 77.4% 



142 



247 



76 
281 

357 



122 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL CASES 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 









Felonies 










Misdemeanors 








Begin 










End 


Begin 










End 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 


Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/88 


Filed Caseload Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


7/1/88 


Filed Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


District 19C 


























Rowan 


117 


995 


1,112 


813 


73.1% 


299 


92 


465 


557 


406 


72.9% 


151 


District 20A 


























Anson 


50 


232 


282 


228 


80.9% 


54 


97 


349 


446 


383 


85.9% 


63 


Moore 


165 


765 


930 


735 


79.0% 


195 


156 


427 


583 


475 


81.5% 


108 


Richmond 


130 


520 


650 


547 


84.2% 


103 


110 


506 


616 


513 


83.3% 


103 


District Totals 


345 


1,517 


1,862 


1,510 


81.1% 


352 


363 


1,282 


1,645 


1,371 


83.3% 


274 


District 20B 


























Stanly 


173 


415 


588 


346 


58.8% 


242 


91 


431 


522 


337 


64.6% 


185 


Union 


122 


730 


852 


712 


83.6% 


140 


144 


531 


675 


530 


78.5% 


145 


District Totals 


295 


1,145 


1,440 


1,058 


73.5% 


382 


235 


962 


1,197 


867 


72.4% 


330 


District 21A-21D 


























Forsyth 


868 


2,876 


3,744 


2,692 


71.9% 


1,052 


674 


2,227 


2,901 


2,204 


76.0% 


697 


District 22 


























Alexander 


31 


135 


166 


72 


43.4% 


94 


36 


248 


284 


212 


74.6% 


72 


Davidson 


167 


313 


480 


394 


82.1% 


86 


107 


522 


629 


532 


84.6% 


97 


Davie 


55 


107 


162 


94 


58.0% 


68 


87 


143 


230 


187 


81.3% 


43 


Iredell 


193 


524 


717 


411 


57.3% 


306 


210 


998 


1,208 


963 


79.7% 


245 


District Totals 


446 


1,079 


1,525 


971 


63.7% 


554 


440 


1,911 


2,351 


1,894 


80.6% 


457 


District 23 


























Alleghany 


16 


28 


44 


33 


75.0% 


11 


18 


36 


54 


29 


53.7% 


25 


Ashe 


47 


81 


128 


77 


60.2% 


51 


62 


98 


160 


82 


51.3% 


78 


Wilkes 


94 


439 


533 


426 


79.9% 


107 


109 


440 


549 


407 


74.1% 


142 


Yadkin 


71 


290 


361 


233 


64.5% 


128 


40 


174 


214 


150 


70.1% 


64 



District Totals 228 



838 1,066 



769 



72.1% 



297 



229 



748 



977 



668 



68.4% 



309 



District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 



46 
68 
57 
273 
49 



88 

93 

107 

246 

43 



134 
161 
164 
519 
92 



District Totals 493 



577 1,070 



85 

84 

124 

376 

63 

732 



63.4% 
52.2% 
75.6% 
72.4% 
68.5% 

68.4% 



49 
77 
40 
143 
29 

338 



10 


27 


37 


18 


48.6% 


19 


21 


25 


46 


33 


71.7% 


13 


29 


44 


73 


41 


56.2% 


32 


41 


97 


138 


99 


71.7% 


39 


17 


49 


66 


33 


50.0% 


33 



118 



242 



360 



224 



62.2% 



136 



District 25 A 

Burke 

Caldwell 



394 
307 



424 818 
715 1,022 



606 
589 



74.1% 
57.6% 



212 
433 



316 

222 



592 908 
707 929 



708 
567 



78.0% 
61.0% 



200 
362 



District Totals 701 1,139 1,840 1,195 



64.9% 



645 



538 



1,299 1,837 1,275 



69.4% 



562 



123 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1,1988 --June 30, 1989 









Felonies 










Misdemeanors 








Begin 










End 


Begin 










End 




Pending 




Total 


< 


% Caseload 


Pending 


Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/88 


Filed Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


7/1/88 


Filed Caseload Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


District 25B 


























Catawba 


605 


968 


1,573 


940 


59.8% 


633 


406 


817 


1,223 


735 


60.1% 


488 


District 26A-26C 


























Mecklenburg 


1,210 


3,122 


4,332 


3,281 


75.7% 


1,051 


587 


1,790 


2,377 


1,787 


75.2% 


590 


District 27A 


























Gaston 


387 


1,800 


2,187 


1,610 


73.6% 


577 


435 


848 


1,283 


907 


70.7% 


376 


District 27B 


























Cleveland 


127 


706 


833 


454 


54.5% 


379 


57 


358 


415 


262 


63.1% 


153 


Lincoln 


71 


460 


531 


337 


63.5% 


194 


76 


250 


326 


276 


84.7% 


50 


District Totals 


198 


1,166 


1,364 


791 


58.0% 


573 


133 


608 


741 


538 


72.6% 


203 


District 28 


























Buncombe 


280 


1,246 


1,526 


1,175 


77.0% 


351 


51 


483 


534 


398 


74.5% 


136 


District 29 


























Henderson 


197 


696 


893 


374 


41.9% 


519 


39 


321 


360 


187 


51.9% 


173 


McDowell 


105 


203 


308 


180 


58.4% 


128 


66 


224 


290 


116 


40.0% 


174 


Polk 


51 


98 


149 


85 


57.0% 


64 


35 


47 


82 


46 


56.1% 


36 


Rutherford 


139 


548 


687 


515 


75.0% 


172 


162 


470 


632 


448 


70.9% 


184 


Transylvania 


234 


251 


485 


296 


61.0% 


189 


26 


82 


108 


61 


56.5% 


47 


District Totals 


726 


1,796 


2,522 


1,450 


57.5% 


1,072 


328 


1,144 


1.472 


858 


58.3% 


614 


District 30A 


























Cherokee 


83 


300 


383 


179 


46.7% 


204 


35 


91 


126 


51 


40.5% 


75 


Clay 


8 


34 


42 


30 


71.4% 


12 


7 


24 


31 


23 


74.2% 


8 


Graham 


27 


98 


125 


77 


61.6% 


48 


22 


30 


52 


49 


94.2% 


3 


Macon 


51 


143 


194 


139 


71.6% 


55 


24 


56 


80 


65 


81.3% 


15 


Swain 


52 


161 


213 


70 


32.9% 


143 


9 


29 


38 


27 


71.1% 


11 


District Totals 


221 


736 


957 


495 


51.7% 


462 


97 


230 


327 


215 


65.7% 


112 


DLstrict 30B 


























Haywood 


155 


420 


575 


464 


80.7% 


111 


54 


271 


325 


244 


75.1% 


81 


Jackson 


181 


295 


476 


297 


62.4% 


179 


26 


100 


126 


97 


77.0% 


29 


District Totals 


336 


715 


1,051 


761 


72.4% 


290 


80 


371 


451 


341 


75.6% 


110 


State Totals 


19,769 


62,752 


82,521 


58,453 


70.8% 


24,068 


10,546 


37,835 


48,381 


36,172 


74.8% 


12,209 



124 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL CASES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS BY PROSECUTORIAL DISTRICT 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 









Felonies 










Misdemeanors 








Begin 










End 


Begin 










End 


Prosecutorial 


Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 


Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 


District 


7/1/88 


Filed Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


7/1/88 


Filed Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


1 


341 


1,039 


1,380 


970 


70.3% 


410 


456 


2,002 


2,458 


1,915 


77.9% 


543 


2 


224 


875 


1,099 


785 


71.4% 


314 


134 


690 


824 


659 


80.0% 


165 


3A 


427 


2,288 


2,715 


2,090 


77.0% 


625 


361 


1,725 


2,086 


1,677 


80.4% 


409 


3B 


248 


1,356 


1,604 


1,139 


71.0% 


465 


106 


1,065 


1,171 


927 


79.2% 


244 


4 


517 


2,383 


2,900 


2,484 


85.7% 


416 


96 


601 


697 


600 


86.1% 


97 


5 


733 


2,959 


3,692 


2,336 


63.3% 


1,356 


303 


1,336 


1,639 


1,310 


79.9% 


329 


6 


245 


990 


1,235 


827 


67.0% 


408 


194 


520 


714 


500 


70.0% 


214 


7 


366 


2,534 


2,900 


2,288 


78.9% 


612 


214 


1,191 


1,405 


1,036 


73.7% 


369 


8 


301 


1,116 


1,417 


1,113 


78.5% 


304 


262 


1,198 


1,460 


1,159 


79.4% 


301 


9 


577 


2,031 


2,608 


1,580 


60.6% 


1,028 


473 


1,262 


1,735 


1,142 


65.8% 


593 


10 


1,342 


3,608 


4,950 


3,745 


75.7% 


1,205 


560 


2,267 


2,827 


2,176 


77.0% 


651 


11 


234 


1,355 


1,589 


1,299 


81.7% 


290 


122 


808 


930 


809 


87.0% 


121 


12 


688 


1,887 


2,575 


1,983 


77.0% 


592 


118 


387 


505 


419 


83.0% 


86 


13 


1,083 


934 


2,017 


1,536 


76.2% 


481 


192 


544 


736 


557 


75.7% 


179 


14 


608 


1,995 


2,603 


1,617 


62.1% 


986 


187 


372 


559 


367 


65.7% 


192 


ISA 


212 


1,488 


1,700 


1,324 


77.9% 


376 


103 


724 


827 


676 


81 .7% 


151 


15B 


319 


989 


1,308 


926 


70.8% 


382 


76 


237 


313 


237 


75.7% 


76 


16A 


380 


503 


883 


706 


80.0% 


177 


270 


347 


617 


498 


80.7% 


119 


16B 


821 


1,986 


2,807 


1,853 


66.0% 


954 


297 


918 


1,215 


764 


62.9% 


451 


17A 


355 


1,479 


1,834 


963 


52.5% 


871 


312 


1,093 


1,405 


993 


70.7% 


412 


17B 


268 


1,100 


1,368 


1,109 


81.1% 


259 


92 


789 


881 


665 


75.5% 


216 


18 


1,307 


4,309 


5,616 


3,906 


69.6% 


1,710 


135 


505 


640 


498 


77.8% 


142 


19A 


392 


1,869 


2,261 


1,653 


73.1% 


608 


314 


1,164 


1,478 


1,080 


73.1% 


398 


19B 


442 


959 


1,401 


791 


56.5% 


610 


455 


1,128 


1,583 


1,226 


77.4% 


357 


20 


640 


2,662 


3,302 


2,568 


77.8% 


734 


598 


2,244 


2,842 


2,238 


78.7% 


604 


21 


868 


2,876 


3,744 


2,692 


71.9% 


1,052 


674 


2,227 


2,901 


2,204 


76.0% 


697 


22 


446 


1,079 


1,525 


971 


63.7% 


554 


440 


1,911 


2,351 


1,894 


80.6% 


457 


23 


228 


838 


1,066 


769 


72.1% 


297 


229 


748 


977 


668 


68.4% 


309 


24 


493 


577 


1,070 


732 


68.4% 


338 


118 


242 


360 


224 


62.2% 


136 


25 


1,306 


2,107 


3,413 


2,135 


62.6% 


1,278 


944 


2,116 


3,060 


2,010 


65.7% 


1,050 


26 


1,210 


3,122 


4,332 


3,281 


75.7% 


1,051 


587 


1,790 


2,377 


1,787 


75.2% 


590 


27A 


387 


1,800 


2,187 


1,610 


73.6% 


577 


435 


848 


1,283 


907 


70.7% 


376 


27B 


198 


1,166 


1,364 


791 


58.0% 


573 


133 


608 


741 


538 


72.6% 


203 


28 


280 


1,246 


1,526 


1,175 


77.0% 


351 


51 


483 


534 


398 


74.5% 


136 


29 


726 


1,796 


2,522 


1,450 


57.5% 


1,072 


328 


1,144 


1,472 


858 


58.3% 


614 


30 


557 


1,451 


2,008 


1,256 


62.5% 


752 


177 


601 


778 


556 


71.5% 


222 


State Totals 


19,769 


62,752 


82,521 


58,453 


70.8% 


24,068 


10,546 


37,835 


48,381 


36,172 


74.8% 


12,209 



This table is provided because prosecutorial districts (shown in the map in Part II) do not coincide with superior court districts. 



125 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



Guiltv Plea to Lesser 
Offense (7.239) 



Guilty Plea to Offense 
Charged (30,594) 




Dismissal (17,208) 



Other (1,532) 

Not Guilty Plea 

(Jury Trial) 

(1,880) 



Guilty pleas continue to account for more than 60% of all 
superior court felony dispositions, with most of them being 
pleas to the offense charged. Dismissals here include voluntary 
dismissals with and without leave and speedy trial dismissals. 
"Other" dispositions, i.e., those which do not fall into one of the 



specific categories on the chart, include changes of venue, 
dismissals by the court, indictments returned not a true bill by 
grand juries, dispositions of writs of habeas corpus on fugitive 
warrants, and dispositions of probation violations from other 
counties. 



126 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1,1988 --June 30, 1989 





Guilty 


Pleas 


Jury 


DA Dismissal 
Without With After Deferred 


Speedy 
Trial 




Total ! 


Total 




As 


Lesser 


Negotiated 




Charged 


Offense 


Trials 


Leave 


Leave 


Prosecution 


Dismissals 


Other 


Dispositions 


Pleas 


District 1 






















Camden 


21 





1 


4 














26 


21 


Chowan 


12 


53 





41 











8 


114 


91 


Currituck 


24 


5 


1 


8 











2 


40 


31 


Dare 


151 


41 


4 


173 


4 








8 


381 


14 


Gates 


16 


18 





8 


2 











44 


37 


Pasquotank 


110 


45 


21 


98 


3 








4 


281 


148 


Perquimans 


36 


30 


4 


13 











1 


84 


71 


District Totals 


370 


192 


31 


345 


9 








23 


970 


413 


% of Total 


38.1% 


19.8% 


3.2% 


35.6% 


0.9% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


2.4% 


100.0% 


42.6% 


District 2 






















Beaufort 


293 


72 


14 


50 


6 








2 


437 


353 


Hyde 


30 


4 


4 


11 


2 








3 


54 


44 


Martin 


103 


19 


17 


7 


2 








4 


152 


106 


Tyrrell 


11 


8 





7 











2 


28 


22 


Washington 


71 


11 


11 


13 


5 








3 


114 


70 


District Totals 


508 


114 


46 


88 


15 








14 


785 


595 


% of Total 


64.7% 


14.5% 


5.9% 


11.2% 


1.9% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


1.8% 


100.0% 


75.8% 


District 3A 






















Pitt 


981 


489 


33 


519 


47 








21 


2,090 


1,542 


% of Total 


46.9% 


23.4% 


1.6% 


24.8% 


2.2% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


1.0% 


100.0% 


73.8% 


District 3B 






















Carteret 


236 


11 





79 


9 








19 


354 


245 


Craven 


377 


69 


7 


239 


28 








16 


736 


494 


Pamlico 


10 


22 


1 


15 











1 


49 


47 


District Totals 


623 


102 


8 


333 


37 








36 


1,139 


786 


% of Total 


54.7% 


9.0% 


0.7% 


29.2% 


3.2% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


3.2% 


100.0% 


69.0% 


District 4A 






















Duplin 


291 


7 


15 


130 


2 











445 


350 


Jones 


28 


8 





13 


3 








4 


56 


48 


Sampson 


272 


26 


2 


155 











9 


464 


179 


District Totals 


591 


41 


17 


298 


5 








13 


965 


577 


% of Total 


61.2% 


4.2% 


1.8% 


30.9% 


0.5% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


1.3% 


100.0% 


59.8% 


District 4B 






















Onslow 


671 


153 


56 


496 


36 








107 


1,519 


769 


% of Total 


44.2% 


10.1% 


3.7% 


32.7% 


2.4% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


7.0% 


100.0% 


50.6% 


District 5 






















New Hanover 


1,263 


138 


34 


464 


44 








87 


2,030 


1,051 


Pender 


135 


18 


5 


38 


108 








2 


306 


188 


District Totals 


1,398 


156 


39 


502 


152 








89 


2,336 


1,239 


% of Total 


59.8% 


6.7% 


1.7% 


21.5% 


6.5% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


3.8% 


100.0% 


53.0% 



127 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1,1988 -June 30, 1989 





Guilty Pleas 


Jury 


DA Dismissal 
Without With After Deferred 


Speedy 
Trial 




Total 


Total 




As 


Lesser 


Negotiated 




Charged 


Offense 


Trials 


Leave 


Leave 


Prosecution 


Dismissals 


Other 


Dispositions 


Pleas 


District 6A 






















Halifax 


198 


30 


32 


130 


4 








6 


400 


290 


% of Total 


49.5% 


7.5% 


8.0% 


32.5% 


1.0% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


1.5% 


100.0% 


72.5% 


District 6B 






















Berlie 


30 


51 


6 


20 











2 


109 


95 


Hertford 


46 


27 


15 


44 


11 


1 





2 


146 


95 


Northampton 


62 


22 


9 


71 


5 








3 


172 


149 


District Totals 


138 


100 


30 


135 


16 


1 





7 


427 


339 


% of Total 


32.3% 


23.4% 


7.0% 


31.6% 


3.7% 


0.2% 


0.0% 


1.6% 


100.0% 


79.4% 


District 7A 






















Nash 


397 


78 


35 


289 


22 








10 


831 


434 


% of Total 


47.8% 


9.4% 


4.2% 


34.8% 


2.6% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


1.2% 


100.0% 


52.2% 


District 7B-C 






















Edgecombe 


283 


53 


10 


276 











16 


638 


202 


Wilson 


310 


71 


38 


377 


3 








20 


819 


589 


District Totals 


593 


124 


48 


653 


3 








36 


1,457 


791 


% of Total 


40.7% 


8.5% 


3.3% 


44.8% 


0.2% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


2.5% 


100.0% 


54.3% 


District 8A 






















Greene 


18 


41 


1 


23 


8 











91 


69 


Lenoir 


225 


31 


35 


131 


34 








21 


477 


277 


District Totals 


243 


72 


36 


154 


42 








21 


568 


346 


% of Total 


42.8% 


12.7% 


6.3% 


27.1% 


7.4% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


3.7% 


100.0% 


60.9% 


District 8B 






















Wayne 


227 


109 


20 


149 


28 








12 


545 


330 


% of Total 


41.7% 


20.0% 


3.7% 


27.3% 


5.1% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


2.2% 


100.0% 


60.6% 


District 9 






















Franklin 


234 


29 


5 


33 


9 








22 


332 


288 


Granville 


241 


4 


3 


106 











9 


363 


245 


Person 


134 


55 


7 


65 


6 








9 


276 


190 


Vance 


409 





5 


93 


4 








8 


519 


409 


Warren 


57 


19 





7 











7 


90 


72 


District Totals 


1,075 


107 


20 


304 


19 








55 


1,580 


1,204 


% of Total 


68.0% 


6.8% 


1.3% 


19.2% 


1.2% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


3.5% 


100.0% 


76.2% 


DLstrlct 10A-D 






















Wake 


2,209 


260 


52 


793 


310 








121 


3,745 


2,420 


% of Total 


59.0% 


6.9% 


1.4% 


21.2% 


8.3% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


3.2% 


100.0% 


64.6% 



128 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 
Julyl, 1988 --June 30, 1989 





Guilty 


Pleas 


Jury 


DA Dismissal 
Without With After Deferred 


Speedy 
Trial 




Total 


Total 




As 


Lesser 


Negotiated 




Charged 


Offense 


Trials 


Leave 


Leave 


Prosecution 


Dismissals 


Other 


Dispositions 


Pleas 


District 11 






















Harnett 


293 


39 


18 


116 











12 


478 


316 


Johnston 


214 


54 


16 


72 


14 








15 


385 


268 


Lee 


201 


90 


18 


105 


8 








14 


436 


279 


District Totals 


708 


183 


52 


293 


22 








41 


1,299 


863 


% of Total 


54.5% 


14.1% 


4.0% 


22.6% 


1.7% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


3.2% 


100.0% 


66.4% 


District 12 AC 






















Cumberland 


1,169 


159 


74 


449 


73 








59 


1,983 


1,255 


% of Total 


59.0% 


8.0% 


3.7% 


22.6% 


3.7% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


3.0% 


100.0% 


63.3% 


District 13 






















Bladen 


151 





2 


226 


1 








7 


387 


117 


Brunswick 


507 


31 


20 


283 


47 








14 


902 


760 


Columbus 


78 


39 


17 


91 


6 





6 


10 


247 


115 


District Totals 


736 


70 


39 


600 


54 





6 


31 


1,536 


992 


% of Total 


47.9% 


4.6% 


2.5% 


39.1% 


3.5% 


0.0% 


0.4% 


2.0% 


100.0% 


64.6% 


District 14A-B 






















Durham 


1,066 


115 


41 


327 


27 








41 


1,617 


1,182 


% of Total 


65.9% 


7.1% 


2.5% 


20.2% 


1.7% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


2.5% 


100.0% 


73.1% 


District ISA 






















Alamance 


897 


131 


33 


234 


23 








6 


1,324 


1,155 


% of Total 


67.7% 


9.9% 


2.5% 


17.7% 


1.7% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


0.5% 


100.0% 


87.2% 


District 15B 






















Chatham 


177 


3 


2 


83 


7 








6 


278 


61 


Orange 


373 





7 


205 


35 








28 


648 


373 


District Totals 


550 


3 


9 


288 


42 








34 


926 


434 


% of Total 


59.4% 


0.3% 


1.0% 


31.1% 


4.5% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


3.7% 


100.0% 


46.9% 


District 16A 






















Hoke 


92 


5 





19 


2 








13 


131 


81 


Scotland 


492 





4 


68 


1 








10 


575 


443 


District Totals 


584 


5 


4 


87 


3 








23 


706 


524 


% of Total 


82.7% 


0.7% 


0.6% 


12.3% 


0.4% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


3.3% 


100.0% 


74.2% 


District 16B 






















Robeson 


1,502 


57 


121 


121 








2 


50 


1,853 


524 


% of Total 


81.1% 


3.1% 


6.5% 


6.5% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


0.1% 


2.7% 


100.0% 


28.3% 



129 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1,1988 -June 30, 1989 





Guilt) 


Pleas 


Jury 


DA Dismissal 


Speedy 
Trial 




Total 


Total 




As 


Lesser 


Without 


With 


After Deferred 


Negotiated 




Charged 


Offense 


Trials 


Leave 


Leave 


Prosecution 


Dismissals 


Other 


Dispositions 


Pleas 


District 17A 






















Caswell 


126 


36 


3 


21 


10 








2 


198 


153 


Rockingham 


450 


84 


2? 


L67 


27 





1 


13 


765 


496 


District Totals 


576 


120 


26 


188 


37 





1 


15 


963 


649 


% of Total 


59.8% 


12.5% 


2.7% 


19.5% 


3.8% 


0.0% 


0.1% 


1.6% 


100.0% 


67.4% 


District 17B 






















Stokes 


200 


14 


1 


14 


3 


1 





57 


290 


67 


Surry 


769 





5 


35 


2 








8 


819 


233 


District Totals 


969 


14 


6 


49 


5 


1 





65 


1,109 


300 


% of Total 


87.4% 


1.3% 


0.5% 


4.4% 


0.5% 


0.1% 


0.0% 


5.9% 


100.0% 


27.1% 


District 18A-E 






















Guilford 


2,545 


298 


131 


637 


236 








59 


3,906 


2,716 


% of Total 


65.2% 


7.6% 


3.4% 


16.3% 


6.0% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


1.5% 


100.0% 


69.5% 


District 19A 






















Cabarrus 


381 


117 


33 


282 


15 








12 


840 


455 


% of Total 


45.4% 


13.9% 


3.9% 


33.6% 


1.8% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


1.4% 


100.0% 


54.2% 


District 19B 






















Montgomery 


62 


5 


7 


26 


2 








8 


110 


65 


Randolph 


420 


54 


33 


125 


36 








13 


681 


394 


District Totals 


482 


59 


40 


151 


38 








21 


791 


459 


% of Total 


60.9% 


7.5% 


5.1% 


19.1% 


4.8% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


2.7% 


100.0% 


58.0% 


District 19C 






















Rowan 


307 


177 


23 


270 


11 








25 


813 


504 


% of Total 


37.8% 


21.8% 


2.8% 


33.2% 


1.4% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


3.1% 


100.0% 


62.0% 


DLstrlct 20A 






















Anson 


32 


<)2 


6 


91 


1 








6 


228 


124 


Moore 


312 


75 


17 


323 











8 


735 


394 


Richmond 


266 


74 


14 


186 


1 








6 


547 


474 


District Totals 


610 


241 


37 


600 


2 








20 


1,510 


992 


% or Total 


40.4% 


16.0% 


2.5% 


39.7% 


0.1% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


1.3% 


100.0% 


65.7% 


District 20B 






















Stanly 


95 


2^ 


12 


201 


2 








13 


346 


282 


Union 


290 


142 


13 


236 


16 








15 


712 


421 


District Totals 


385 


165 


2 C . 


437 


IX 








28 


1,058 


703 


% of Total 


36.4% 


15.6% 


2.4% 


41.3% 


1.7% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


2.6% 


100.0% 


66.4% 


DLstrlct 21 A-D 






















Forsyth 


1,507 


420 


54 


567 


120 








24 


2,692 


1,336 


% of Total 


56.0% 


15.6% 


2.0% 


21.1% 


4.5% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


0.9% 


100.0% 


49.6% 



130 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1,1988 -June 30, 1989 





Guilty 


Pleas 


Jury 


DA 


Dismb 




As 


Lesser 


Without 


With 




Charged 


Offense 


Trials 


Leave 


Leave 


District 22 












Alexander 


37 


9 


1 


13 





Davidson 


220 


18 


26 


89 


16 


Davie 


44 


7 


11 


23 


1 


Iredell 


258 


45 


20 


74 


5 


District Totals 


559 


79 


58 


199 


22 


% of Total 


57.6% 


8.1% 


6.0% 


20.5% 


2.3% 


District 23 












Alleghany 


18 


1 


1 


7 


1 


Ashe 


24 


35 


3 


9 





Wilkes 


338 


16 


26 


21 





Yadkin 


183 


15 


12 


17 


2 


District Totals 


563 


67 


42 


54 


3 


% of Total 


73.2% 


8.7% 


5.5% 


7.0% 


0.4% 


District 24 












Avery 


4 


32 


13 


33 


1 


Madison 


8 


25 


2 


46 


1 


Mitchell 


76 


8 





27 


7 


Watauga 


99 


50 


7 


195 


16 


Yancey 





34 


8 


21 





District Totals 


187 


149 


30 


322 


25 


% of Total 


25.5% 


20.4% 


4.1% 


44.0% 


3.4% 


District 25A 












Burke 


191 


72 


5 


317 


12 


Caldwell 


178 


88 


9 


264 


30 


District Totals 


369 


160 


14 


581 


42 


% of Total 


30.9% 


13.4% 


1.2% 


48.6% 


3.5% 


District 25 B 












Catawba 


548 


1 


9 


264 


97 


% of Total 


58.3% 


0.1% 


1.0% 


28.1% 


10.3% 


District 26A-C 












Mecklenburg 


265 


1,831 


155 


793 


157 


% of Total 


8.1% 


55.8% 


4.7% 


24.2% 


4.8% 


District 27A 












Gaston 


685 


65 


79 


617 


124 


% of Total 


42.5% 


4.0% 


4.9% 


38.3% 


7.7% 



ial Speedy Total 

After Deferred Trial Total Negotiated 

Prosecution Dismissals Other Dispositions Pleas 









12 


72 


32 








25 


394 


162 








8 


94 


42 








M 


411 


148 








54 


971 


384 


0.0% 


0.0% 


5.6% 


100.0% 


39.5% 








5 


33 


21 








6 


77 


57 








25 


426 


181 








4 


233 


184 








40 


769 


443 


0.0% 


0.0% 


5.2% 


100.0% 


57.6% 








2 


85 


42 








2 


84 


40 








6 


124 


105 


1 





8 


376 


286 











63 


57 


1 





18 


732 


530 


0.1% 


0.0% 


2.5% 


100.0% 


72.4% 








9 


606 


159 








20 


589 


396 








29 


1,195 


555 


0.0% 


0.0% 


2.4% 


100.0% 


46.4% 



21 940 325 

0.0% 0.0% 2.2% 100.0% 34.69 



2 
0.1% 




0.0% 




0.0% 



1 

0.1% 



78 
2.4% 



39 
2.4% 



3,281 
100.0% 



1,610 
100.0% 



1,844 
56.2% 



737 
45.8% 



131 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 
July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 





Guilty Pleas 


Jury 


DA Dismissal 
Without With After Deferred 


Speedy 
Trial 




Total 


Total 




As 


Lesser 


Negotiated 




Charged 


Offense 


Trials 


Leave 


Leave 


Prosecution 


Dismissals 


Other 


Dispositions 


Pleas 


District 27B 






















Cleveland 


199 


50 


23 


169 











13 


454 


36 


Lincoln 


182 


1 


24 


114 


5 








11 


337 


172 


District Totals 


381 


51 


47 


283 


5 








24 


791 


208 


% of Total 


48.2% 


6.4% 


5.9% 


35.8% 


0.6% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


3.0% 


100.0% 


26.3% 


District 28 






















Buncombe 


696 


88 


17 


274 


79 








21 


1,175 


764 


% of Total 


59.2% 


7.5% 


1.4% 


23.3% 


6.7% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


1.8% 


100.0% 


65.0% 


District 29 






















Henderson 


184 


22 


21 


120 


23 








4 


374 


201 


McDowell 


110 


2 


5 


52 


9 








2 


180 


118 


Polk 


30 


2 


4 


42 


5 








2 


85 


48 


Rutherford 


341 


29 


24 


100 


12 








9 


515 


165 


Transylvania 


212 


10 


7 


66 











1 


296 


208 


District Totals 


877 


65 


61 


380 


49 








18 


1,450 


740 


% of Total 


60.5% 


4.5% 


4.2% 


26.2% 


3.4% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


1.2% 


100.0% 


51.0% 


District 30A 






















Cherokee 





22 


66 


80 


1 








10 


179 


140 


Clay 


7 


11 





11 











1 


30 


25 


Graham 


2 


34 


11 


28 











2 


77 


57 


Macon 


37 


37 


1 


51 


10 








3 


139 


105 


Swain 


5 


25 


8 


26 











6 


70 


38 


District Totals 


51 


129 


86 


196 


11 








22 


495 


365 


% of Total 


10.3% 


26.1% 


17.4% 


39.6% 


2.2% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


4.4% 


100.0% 


73.7% 


District 30B 






















Haywood 


142 


46 


28 


218 


9 


1 





20 


464 


272 


Jackson 


75 


47 


3 


149 











23 


297 


245 


District Totals 


217 


93 


31 


367 


9 


1 





43 


761 


517 


% of Total 


28.5% 


12.2% 


4.1% 


48.2% 


1.2% 


0.1% 


0.0% 


5.7% 


100.0% 


67.9% 


Stale Totals 


30,594 


7,239 


1,880 


15,098 


2,094 


6 


10 


1,532 


58,453 


34,530 


% of Total 


52.3% 


12.4% 


3.2% 


25.8% 


3.6% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


2.6% 


100.0% 


59.1% 



132 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES IN THE 

SUPERIOR COURTS BY PROSECUTORIAL DISTRICT 

July 1,1988 --June 30, 1989 



Prosecutorial 


Guilty 
As 
Charged 


Pleas 
Lesser 
Offense 


Jury 
Trials 


DA Dismissal 


Speedy 

Trial 

Dismissals 


Other 


Total 
Dispositions 


Total 


District 


Without 
Leave 


With 
Leave 


After Deferred 
Prosecution 


Negotiated 
Pleas 


1 

% of Total 


370 
38.1% 


192 
19.8% 


31 
3.2% 


345 
35.6% 


9 

0.9% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


23 

2.4% 


970 

100.0% 


413 

42.6% 


2 
% of Total 


508 
64.7% 


114 
14.5% 


46 
5.9% 


88 
11.2% 


15 
1.9% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


14 
1.8% 


785 
100.0% 


595 

75.8% 


3A 

% of Total 


981 
46.9% 


489 
23.4% 


33 
1.6% 


519 
24.8% 


47 
2.2% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


21 
1.0% 


2,090 
100.0% 


1,542 
73.8% 


3B 

% of Total 


623 

54.7% 


102 
9.0% 


8 
0.7% 


333 

29.2% 


37 
3.2% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


36 

3.2% 


1,139 
100.0% 


786 
69.0% 


4 

% of Total 


1,262 
50.8% 


194 

7.8% 


73 
2.9% 


794 
32.0% 


41 
1.7% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


120 
4.8% 


2,484 
100.0% 


1,346 
54.2% 


5 

% of Total 


1,398 
59.8% 


156 

6.7% 


39 
1.7% 


502 
21.5% 


152 
6.5% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


89 
3.8% 


2,336 
100.0% 


1,239 
53.0% 


6 

% of Total 


336 
40.6% 


130 

15.7% 


62 
7.5% 


265 

32.0% 


20 
2.4% 


1 

0.1% 



0.0% 


13 
1.6% 


827 
100.0% 


629 

76.1% 


7 
% of Total 


990 
43.3% 


202 

8.8% 


83 
3.6% 


942 
41.2% 


25 
1.1% 




0.0% 



0.0% 


46 
2.0% 


2,288 
100.0% 


1,225 
53.5% 


8 

% of Total 


470 
42.2% 


181 

16.3% 


56 
5.0% 


303 

27.2% 


70 
6.3% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


33 
3.0% 


1,113 
100.0% 


676 
60.7% 


9 

% of Total 


1,075 
68.0% 


107 
6.8% 


20 
1.3% 


304 
19.2% 


19 

1.2% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


55 
3.5% 


1,580 
100.0% 


1,204 
76.2% 


10 

% of Total 


2,209 
59.0% 


260 
6.9% 


52 
1.4% 


793 

21.2% 


310 

8.3% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


121 

3.2% 


3,745 
100.0% 


2,420 
64.6% 


11 

% of Total 


708 
54.5% 


183 
14.1% 


52 
4.0% 


293 
22.6% 


22 
1.7% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


41 
3.2% 


1,299 
100.0% 


863 
66.4% 


12 

% of Total 


1,169 
59.0% 


159 

8.0% 


74 
3.7% 


449 
22.6% 


73 
3.7% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


59 
3.0% 


1,983 
100.0% 


1,255 
63.3% 


13 

% of Total 


736 

47.9% 


70 
4.6% 


39 

2.5% 


600 

39.1% 


54 
3.5% 



0.0% 


6 
0.4% 


31 
2.0% 


1,536 
100.0% 


992 
64.6% 


14 

% of Total 


1,066 
65.9% 


115 
7.1% 


41 
2.5% 


327 
20.2% 


27 
1.7% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


41 
2.5% 


1,617 
100.0% 


1,182 
73.1% 


ISA 

% of Total 


897 
67.7% 


131 
9.9% 


33 
2.5% 


234 

17.7% 


23 
1.7% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


6 
0.5% 


1,324 
100.0% 


1,155 
87.2% 


1SB 

% of Total 


550 

59.4% 


3 

0.3% 


9 
1.0% 


288 
31.1% 


42 
4.5% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


34 
3.7% 


926 

100.0% 


434 
46.9% 


16A 

% of Total 


584 

82.7% 


5 
0.7% 


4 
0.6% 


87 
12.3% 


3 

0.4% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


23 
3.3% 


706 

100.0% 


524 

74.2% 


16B 

% of Total 


1,502 
81.1% 


57 
3.1% 


121 
6.5% 


121 
6.5% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


2 
0.1% 


50 
2.7% 


1,853 
100.0% 


524 

28.3% 



This table is provided because prosecutorial districts (shown in the map in Part II) do not coincide with superior court districts. 



133 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF FELONIES IN THE 

SUPERIOR COURTS BY PROSECUTORIAL DISTRICT 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 



Prosecutorial 


Guilty 
As 
Charged 


Pleas 
Lesser 
Offense 


Jury 
Trials 


DA Dismissal 


Speedy 

Trial 

Dismissals 


Other 


Total 
Dispositions 


Total 


District 


Without 
Leave 


With 
Leave 


After Deferred 
Prosecution 


Negotiated 
Pleas 


17A 

% of Total 


576 
59.8% 


120 
12.5% 


26 
2.7% 


188 
19.5% 


37 
3.8% 



0.0% 


1 
0.1% 


15 
1.6% 


963 

100.0% 


649 

67.4% 


17B 

% of Total 


969 
87.4% 


14 
1.3% 


6 
0.5% 


40 
44% 


5 
0.5% 


1 

0.1% 



0.0% 


65 
5.9% 


1,109 
100.0% 


300 
27.1% 


18 
% of Total 


2,545 
65.2% 


298 
7.6% 


131 
3.4% 


637 
16.3% 


236 
6.0% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


59 
1.5% 


3,906 
100.0% 


2,716 
69.5% 


19A 

% of Total 


688 
41.6% 


294 
17.8% 


56 

3.4% 


552 

33.4% 


26 

1.6% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


37 
2.2% 


1,653 
100.0% 


959 

58.0% 


19B 

% of Total 


482 
60.9% 


59 
7.5% 


40 
5.1% 


151 
19.1% 


38 

4.8% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


21 

2.7% 


791 
100.0% 


459 

58.0% 


20 
% of Total 


995 

38.7% 


406 

15.8% 


62 
2.4% 


1,037 
40.4% 


20 
0.8% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


48 
1.9% 


2,568 
100.0% 


1,695 
66.0% 


21 
% of Total 


1,507 
56.0% 


420 
15.6% 


54 
2.0% 


567 
21.1% 


120 
4.5% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


24 
0.9% 


2,692 
100.0% 


1,336 
49.6% 


22 

% of Total 


559 

57.6% 


79 
8.1% 


58 
6.0% 


199 

20.5% 


22 
2.3% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


54 
5.6% 


971 
100.0% 


384 
39.5% 


23 
% of Total 


563 

73.2% 


67 
8.7% 


42 
5.5% 


54 
7.0% 


3 
0.4% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


40 

5.2% 


769 
100.0% 


443 
57.6% 


24 
% of Total 


187 
25.5% 


149 
20.4% 


30 
4.1% 


322 
44.0% 


25 
3.4% 


1 

0.1% 



0.0% 


18 
2.5% 


732 
100.0% 


530 

72.4% 


25 
% of Total 


917 
43.0% 


161 
7.5% 


23 
1.1% 


845 
39.6% 


139 
6.5% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


50 

2.3% 


2,135 
100.0% 


880 
41.2% 


26 

% of Total 


265 
8.1% 


1,831 
55.8% 


155 

4.7% 


793 
24.2% 


157 
4.8% 


2 
0.1% 



0.0% 


78 
2.4% 


3,281 
100.0% 


1,844 
56.2% 


27A 
% of Total 


685 
42.5% 


65 
4.0% 


79 
4.9% 


617 
38.3% 


124 

7.7% 



0.0% 


1 

0.1% 


39 
2.4% 


1,610 
100.0% 


737 
45.8% 


27B 

% of Total 


381 
48.2% 


51 
6.4% 


47 
5.9% 


283 
35.8% 


5 
0.6% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


24 
3.0% 


791 
100.0% 


208 
26.3% 


28 

% of Total 


696 

59.2% 


88 
7.5% 


17 
1.4% 


274 
23.3% 


79 
6.7% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


21 
1.8% 


1,175 
100.0% 


764 
65.0% 


29 
% of Total 


877 
60.5% 


65 
4.5% 


61 
4.2% 


380 
26.2% 


49 
3.4% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


18 

1.2% 


1,450 
100.0% 


740 
51.0% 


30 
% of Total 


268 

21.3% 


222 
17.7% 


117 
9.3% 


563 

44.8% 


20 
1.6% 


1 

0.1% 



0.0% 


65 
5.2% 


1,256 
100.0% 


882 
70.2% 


Stale Totals 
% of Total 


30,594 
52.3% 


7,239 

12.4% 


1,880 
3.2% 


15,098 
25.8% 


2,094 
3.6% 


6 

0.0% 


10 
0.0% 


1,532 
2.6% 


58,453 
100.0% 


34,530 
59.1% 



This table is provided because prosecutorial districts (shown in the map in Part II) do not coincide with superior court districts. 



134 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



Other (12,779) 



Dismissal (8,927) 



Guilty Plea to Lesser 
Offense (1,590) 




Not Guilty Plea 

(Jury Trial) 

(950) 



Guilty Plea to Offense 
Charged (11,926) 



Guilty pleas account for 37% of misdemeanor dispositions in 
superior court, the overwhelming majority of which are guilty 
pleas to the offense charged. The "Other" category here 
includes withdrawn appeals, cases remanded to district court 



for judgment, and other miscellaneous dispositions such as 
changes of venue, dismissals by the court, and probation 
violations from other counties. Dismissals include voluntary 
dismissals with and without leave and speedy trial dismissals. 



135 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 
July 1,1988 -June 30, 1989 

Speedy 





Guilty Pleas 


Jury 


DA Dismissal 




As 


Lesser 


Without 


With A 




Charged 


Offense 


Trials 


Leave 


Leave 


District 1 












Camden 


4 3 


5 


1 


11 


1 


Chowan 


38 


23 


1 


2o 





Currituck 


70 


25 





26 


8 


Dare 


173 


40 


11 


109 


3 


Gates 


24 


16 


1 


13 


5 


Pasquotank 


164 


8 


12 


61 


37 


Perquimans 


50 


13 


8 


17 


5 


District Totals 


562 


139 


40 


263 


59 


c c of Total 


29.3% 


7.3% 


2.1% 


13.7% 


3.1% 


District 2 












Beaufort 


132 


10 


19 


57 


16 


Hyde 


2 


7 


5 


8 





Martin 


19 


4 


2 


8 


3 


Tyrrell 


IS 


10 


2 


5 





Washington 


14 


2 


3 


9 





District Totals 


185 


33 


31 


87 


19 


% of Total 


28.1% 


5.0% 


4.7% 


13.2% 


2.9% 


District 3A 












Pin 


951 


47 


30 


184 


83 


% of Total 


56.7% 


2.8% 


1.8% 


1 1 .0% 


4.9% 


District 3B 












Carteret 


62 


2 





20 


12 


Craven 


195 


25 


8 


112 


35 


Pamlico 


11 


2 


1 


2 





District Totals 


268 


29 


9 


1 34 


47 


% of Total 


28.9% 


3.1% 


1.0% 


14.5% 


5.1% 


District 4A 












Duplin 


24 





2 


45 





Jones 


2 


2 





2 





Sampson 


49 


7 


6 


]') 





District Totals 


75 


9 


X 


66 





% of Total 


38.3% 


4.6% 


4.1% 


33.7% 


0.0% 


DLstrlct 4B 












Onslow 


110 


8 


2 3 


125 


15 


% of Total 


27.2% 


2.0% 


5.7% 


30.9% 


3.7% 


District 5 












New Hanover 


657 


27 


1 1 


221 


43 


Pender 


58 


9 


3 


22 


9 


District Totals 


715 


36 


14 


243 


52 


% of Tola.} 


54.6% 


2.7% 


1.1% 


18.5% 


4.0% 



Total 
After Deferred Trial Total Negotiated 

Prosecution Dismissals Other Dispositions Pleas 









14 


75 


26 








107 


195 


41 








39 


174 


64 








314 


659 


3 








41 


100 


16 








297 


579 


63 








40 


133 


32 








852 


1,915 


245 


0.0% 


0.0% 


44.5% 


100.0% 


12.8% 








204 


438 


107 








9 


31 


12 








46 


82 


18 











35 


12 








45 


73 


12 








304 


659 


161 


0.0% 


0.0% 


46.1% 


100.0% 


24.4% 








382 


1,677 


736 


0.0% 


0.0% 


22.8% 


100.0% 


43.9% 








100 


196 


26 








329 


704 


144 








11 


27 


13 








440 


927 


183 


0.0% 


0.0% 


47.5% 


100.0% 


19.7% 








15 


86 


37 








2 


8 


4 








21 


102 


18 








38 


196 


59 


0.0% 


0.0% 


19.4% 


100.0% 


30.1% 








123 


404 


63 


0.0% 


0.0% 


30.4% 


100.0% 


15.6% 








227 


1,186 


464 








23 


124 


37 








250 


1,310 


501 


0.0% 


0.0% 


19.1% 


100.0% 


38.2% 



136 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 





Guilty 


Pleas 


Jury 


DA Dismissal 
Without With After Deferred 


Speedy 
Trial 




Total 


Total 




As 


Lesser 


Negotiated 




Charged 


Offense 


Trials 


Leave 


Leave 


Prosecution 


Dismissals 


Other 


Dispositions 


Pleas 


District 6A 






















Halifax 


72 


4 


6 


77 


4 








55 


218 


63 


% of Total 


33.0% 


1.8% 


2.8% 


35.3% 


1.8% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


25.2% 


100.0% 


28.9% 


District 6B 






















Bertie 


8 


18 


2 


13 











17 


58 


25 


Hertford 


37 


5 


4 


46 


15 








33 


140 


39 


Northampton 


24 


7 


2 


13 


2 








36 


K4 


37 


District Totals 


69 


30 


8 


72 


17 








86 


282 


101 


% of Total 


24.5% 


10.6% 


2.8% 


25.5% 


6.0% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


30.5% 


100.0% 


35.8% 


District 7A 






















Nash 


212 


12 


4 


103 


21 








65 


417 


69 


% of Total 


50.8% 


2.9% 


1.0% 


24.7% 


5.0% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


15.6% 


100.0% 


16.5% 


District 7B-C 






















Edgecombe 


95 


8 


6 


108 


7 








75 


299 


27 


Wilson 


109 


11 


6 


57 


6 








131 


320 


79 


District Totals 


204 


19 


12 


165 


13 








206 


619 


106 


% of Total 


33.0% 


3.1% 


1.9% 


26.7% 


2.1% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


33.3% 


100.0% 


17.1% 


District 8A 






















Greene 


3 


9 


4 


5 











18 


39 


12 


Lenoir 


114 


7 


9 


84 


26 








171 


411 


74 


District Totals 


117 


16 


13 


89 


26 








189 


450 


86 


% of Total 


26.0% 


3.6% 


2.9% 


19.8% 


5.8% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


42.0% 


100.0% 


19.1% 


District 8B 






















Wayne 


259 


95 


25 


112 


31 








187 


709 


288 


% of Total 


36.5% 


13.4% 


3.5% 


15.8% 


4.4% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


26.4% 


100.0% 


40.6% 


District 9 






















Franklin 


118 


7 





42 


16 








87 


270 


136 


Granville 


90 


1 


4 


41 











49 


185 


90 


Person 


96 


18 


4 


49 


5 








37 


209 


114 


Vance 


183 





3 


98 


9 








84 


377 


166 


Warren 


58 


4 


2 


23 











14 


101 


55 


District Totals 


545 


30 


13 


253 


30 








271 


1,142 


561 


% of Total 


47.7% 


2.6% 


1.1% 


22.2% 


2.6% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


23.7% 


100.0% 


49.1% 


District 10A-D 






















Wake 


440 


27 


26 


268 


665 





6 


744 


2,176 


406 


% of Total 


20.2% 


1.2% 


1.2% 


12.3% 


30.6% 


0.0% 


0.3% 


34.2% 


100.0% 


18.7% 



137 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 





Guilty Pleas 


Jury 
Trials 

1 

13 

6 


DA Dismissal 
Without With After Deferred 
Leave Leave Prosecution 

27 
59 23 
76 5 


Speedy 

Trial 

Dismissals 






Other 

34 

151 

49 


Total 
Dispositions 

185 
443 
181 


Total 


District 11 

Harnett 

Johnston 

Lee 


As 

Charged 

117 
155 

40 


Lesser 
Offense 

42 
5 


Negotiated 
Pleas 

109 
203 

34 


District Totals 
96 of Total 


312 

38.6% 


53 

6.6% 


20 
2.5% 


162 
20.0% 


28 

3.5% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


234 
28.9% 


809 
100.0% 


346 

42.8% 


District 12A-C 

Cumberland 
% of Total 


119 

28.4% 


1 
0.2% 


15 

3.6% 


84 
20.0% 


10 
2.4% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


190 

45.3% 


419 
100.0% 


98 

23.4% 


District 13 

Bladen 

Brunswick 

Columbus 


48 
62 
36 




22 
8 


6 

7 
26 


21 

23 
37 


15 

21 

7 












47 

20 

151 


137 
155 
265 


37 
78 
33 


District Totals 
% of Total 


146 

26.2% 


30 
5.4% 


39 
7.0% 


81 
14.5% 


43 
7.7% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


218 
39.1% 


557 
100.0% 


148 
26.6% 


District 14A-B 

Durham 
% of Total 


127 
34.6% 


12 
3.3% 


12 
3.3% 


69 

18.8% 


39 

10.6% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


108 
29.4% 


367 

100.0% 


141 

38.4% 


District ISA 

Alamance 
% of Total 


394 
58.3% 


10 
1.5% 


24 
3.6% 


71 
10.5% 


19 
2.8% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


158 

23.4% 


676 
100.0% 


391 

57.8% 


District 1SB 

Chatham 
Orange 


35 
37 


6 



5 
11 


5 

35 


3 
6 










46 
48 


100 
137 


8 
34 


District Totals 
% of Total 


72 
30.4% 


6 
2.5% 


16 
6.8% 


40 
16.9% 


9 
3.8% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


94 
39.7% 


237 
100.0% 


42 
17.7% 


DLstrlct 16A 

Hoke 
Scotland 


27 
240 


3 
1 


5 



14 
26 



21 










8 
153 


57 
441 


26 
162 


District Totals 
% of Total 


267 
53.6% 


4 
0.8% 


5 

1.0% 


40 
8.0% 


21 
4.2% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


161 

32.3% 


498 
100.0% 


188 

37.8% 


DLstrlct 16B 

Robeson 
% of Total 


302 
39.5% 


4 
0.5% 


33 

4.3% 


46 
6.0% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


4 
0.5% 


375 
49.1% 


764 
100.0% 


150 
19.6% 



138 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

July 1,1988 -June 30, 1989 





Guilty 


Pleas 


Jury 


DA Dismissal 
Without With After Deferred 


Speedy 
Trial 




Total 


Total 




As 


Lesser 


Negotiated 




Charged 


Offense 


Trials 


Leave 


Leave 


Prosecution 


Dismissals 


Other 


Dispositions 


Pleas 


District 17A 






















Caswell 


% 


18 


3 


30 


21 








57 


225 


81 


Rockingham 


296 


22 


13 


126 


54 





3 


254 


768 


251 


District Totals 


392 


40 


16 


156 


75 





3 


311 


993 


332 


% of Total 


39.5% 


4.0% 


1.6% 


15.7% 


7.6% 


0.0% 


0.3% 


31.3% 


100.0% 


33.4% 


District 17B 






















Stokes 


79 


7 


5 





1 








41 


133 


8 


Surry 


295 





3 


26 


13 








195 


532 


44 


District Totals 


374 


7 


8 


26 


14 








236 


665 


52 


% of Total 


56.2% 


1.1% 


1.2% 


3.9% 


2.1% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


35.5% 


100.0% 


7.8% 


District 18A-E 






















Guilford 


197 


13 


20 


73 


37 








158 


498 


179 


% of Total 


39.6% 


2.6% 


4.0% 


14.7% 


7.4% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


31.7% 


100.0% 


35.9% 


District 19A 






















Cabarrus 


207 


14 


21 


197 


51 








184 


674 


94 


% of Total 


30.7% 


2.1% 


3.1% 


29.2% 


7.6% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


27.3% 


100.0% 


13.9% 


District 19B 






















Montgomery 


73 


7 


4 


50 


35 








139 


308 


71 


Randolph 


363 


20 


36 


111 


88 








300 


918 


281 


District Totals 


436 


27 


40 


161 


123 








439 


1,226 


352 


% of Total 


35.6% 


2.2% 


3.3% 


13.1% 


10.0% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


35.8% 


100.0% 


28.7% 


District 19C 






















Rowan 


87 


4 


11 


87 


28 








189 


406 


63 


% of Total 


21.4% 


1.0% 


2.7% 


21.4% 


6.9% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


46.6% 


100.0% 


15.5% 


District 20A 






















Anson 


105 


47 


6 


91 


4 








130 


383 


122 


Moore 


125 


18 


6 


163 











163 


475 


147 


Richmond 


133 


31 


5 


124 


9 








211 


513 


242 


District Totals 


363 


% 


17 


378 


13 








504 


1,371 


511 


% of Total 


26.5% 


7.0% 


1.2% 


27.6% 


0.9% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


36.8% 


100.0% 


37.3% 


District 20B 






















Stanly 


87 


14 


2 


114 


10 








110 


337 


162 


Union 


109 


18 


7 


119 


29 








248 


530 


105 


District Totals 


196 


32 


9 


233 


39 








358 


867 


267 


% of Total 


22.6% 


3.7% 


1.0% 


26.9% 


4.5% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


41.3% 


100.0% 


30.8% 


District 21A-D 






















Forsyth 


930 


78 


17 


383 


131 








665 


2,204 


664 


% of Total 


42.2% 


3.5% 


0.8% 


17.4% 


5.9% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


30.2% 


100.0% 


30.1% 



139 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 
July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

al Speedy 

After Deferred Trial 
Prosecution Dismissals Other 





Guilty Pleas 


Jury 


DA 


Dismiss. 




As 


Lesser 


Without 


With 




Charged 


Offense 


Trials 


Leave 


Leave 


District 22 












Alexander 


27 


2 


3 


32 


2 


Davidson 


110 


13 


6 


72 


32 


Davie 


55 


9 


7 


26 


3 


Iredell 


116 


47 


8 


96 


26 


District Totals 


308 


71 


24 


226 


63 


% of Total 


16.3% 


3.7% 


1.3% 


1 1 .9% 


3.3% 


District 23 












Alleghany 


8 





3 


4 


1 


Ashe 


16 


2 


5 


15 





Wilkes 


68 


8 


15 


28 





Yadkin 


29 


1 


1 


17 


3 


District Totals 


121 


11 


24 


64 


4 


% of Total 


18.1% 


1.6% 


3.6% 


9.6% 


0.6% 


District 24 












Avery 


3 





5 


3 


1 


Madison 


1 


1 


9 


10 


8 


Mitchell 


10 


1 


1 


19 





Watauga 


27 


2 


6 


34 


5 


Yancey 


9 


10 


3 


9 





District Totals 


50 


14 


24 


75 


14 


% of Total 


22.3% 


6.3% 


10.7% 


33.5% 


6.3% 


District 2SA 












Burke 


208 


27 


9 


125 


31 


Caldwell 


144 


37 


8 


95 


34 


District Totals 


352 


64 


17 


220 


65 


% of Total 


27.6% 


5.0% 


1.3% 


17.3% 


5.1% 


District 2SB 












Catawba 


244 





11 


139 


51 


% of Total 


33.2% 


0.0% 


1.5% 


18.9% 


6.9% 


District 26A-C 












Mecklenburg 


69 


381 


70 


756 


51 


% of Total 


3.9% 


21.3% 


3.9% 


42.3% 


2.9% 


District 27A 












Gaston 


297 


12 


69 


252 


92 


% of Total 


32.7% 


1.3% 


7.6% 


27.8% 


10.1% 









0.0% 









0.0% 



0.4% 







0.0% 









0.0% 









0.0% 










0.0% 







0.0% 



Total 
Total Negotiated 
Dispositions Pleas 



146 

299 

87 

670 

1,202 
63.5% 



13 

44 

288 

99 

444 
66.5% 



6 

4 
10 
24 

2 

46 
20.5% 



308 
249 

557 
43.7% 



212 
532 
187 
963 

1,894 
100.0% 



29 

82 
407 
150 

668 
100.0% 



18 
33 
41 
99 
33 

224 
100.0% 



708 
567 

1,275 
100.0% 



16 

65 

30 

101 

212 
11.2% 



6 
10 

23 
28 

67 
10.0% 





6 
22 
37 
18 

83 
37.1% 



72 
186 

258 
20.2% 



290 735 154 

0.0% 0.0% 39.5% 100.0% 21.0% 




0.0% 



0.0% 


460 

25.7% 


1,787 
100.0% 


383 
21.4% 



0.0% 


3 
0.3% 


182 
20.1% 


907 
100.0% 


231 
25.5% 



140 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 
July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 





Guilty 


Pleas 


Jury 


DA Dismissal 
Without With After Deferred 


Speedy 
Trial 




Total 


Total 




As 


Lesser 


Negotiated 




Charged 


Offense 


Trials 


Leave 


Leave 


Prosecution 


Dismissals 


Other 


Dispositions 


Pleas 


District 27B 






















Cleveland 


94 


10 


18 


63 











77 


262 


9 


Lincoln 


94 





13 


37 


7 








125 


276 


62 


District Totals 


188 


10 


31 


100 


7 








202 


538 


71 


% of Total 


34.9% 


1.9% 


5.8% 


18.6% 


1.3% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


37.5% 


100.0% 


13.2% 


District 28 






















Buncombe 


178 


3 


9 


66 


35 








107 


398 


127 


% of Total 


44.7% 


0.8% 


2.3% 


16.6% 


8.8% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


26.9% 


100.0% 


31.9% 


District 29 






















Henderson 


72 


6 


4 


38 


9 








58 


187 


36 


McDowell 


38 





7 


33 


2 








36 


116 


28 


Polk 


15 





2 


4 


5 








20 


46 


14 


Rutherford 


136 


9 


14 


62 


22 








205 


448 


47 


Transylvania 


28 





6 


14 











13 


61 


7 


District Totals 


289 


15 


33 


151 


38 








332 


858 


132 


% of Total 


33.7% 


1.7% 


3.8% 


17.6% 


4.4% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


38.7% 


100.0% 


15.4% 


District 30A 






















Cherokee 





4 


19 


10 











18 


51 


31 


Clay 


9 


1 


1 


8 











4 


23 


13 


Graham 


14 


9 


7 


15 


3 








1 


49 


20 


Macon 


20 


1 


5 


17 


2 








20 


65 


29 


Swain 


2 


10 


2 


3 











10 


27 


15 


District Totals 


45 


25 


34 


53 


5 








53 


215 


108 


% of Total 


20.9% 


11.6% 


15.8% 


24.7% 


2.3% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


24.7% 


100.0% 


50.2% 


District 30B 






















Haywood 


43 


12 


16 


61 


7 








105 


244 


88 


Jackson 


37 


7 


3 


25 











25 


97 


64 


District Totals 


80 


19 


19 


86 


7 








130 


341 


152 


% of Total 


23.5% 


5.6% 


5.6% 


25.2% 


2.1% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


38.1% 


100.0% 


44.6% 


State Totals 


11,926 


1,590 


950 


6,716 


2,194 


1 


16 


12,779 


36,172 


9,624 


% of Total 


33.0% 


4.4% 


2.6% 


18.6% 


6.1% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


35.3% 


100.0% 


26.6% 



141 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS IN THE 
SUPERIOR COURTS BY PROSECUTORIAL DISTRICT 

July 1,1988 -June 30, 1989 



Prosecutorial 


Guilty 


Pleas 


Jury 
Trials 


DA Dismissal 


Speedy 

Trial 

Dismissals 


Other 


Total 
Dispositions 


Total 


District 


As 
Charged 


Lesser 
Offense 


Without 
Leave 


With 
Leave 


After Deferred 
Prosecution 


Negotiated 
Pleas 


1 
% of Total 


562 
29.3% 


139 
7.3% 


40 
2.1% 


263 

13.7% 


59 

3.1% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


852 
44.5% 


1,915 
100.0% 


245 

12.8% 


: 

% of Total 


185 
28.1% 


33 
5.0% 


31 
4.7% 


87 
13.2% 


19 

2.9% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


304 
46.1% 


659 
100.0% 


161 

24.4% 


3 A 

% of Total 


951 
56.7% 


47 
2.8% 


30 
1.8% 


184 
1 1 .0% 


83 
4.9% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


382 
22.8% 


1,677 
100.0% 


736 
43.9% 


3B 
% of Total 


268 
28.9% 


29 
3.1% 


9 
1.0% 


134 
14.5% 


47 
5.1% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


440 

47.5% 


927 
100.0% 


183 
19.7% 


4 
% of Total 


185 

30.8% 


17 
2.8% 


31 
5.2% 


191 

31.8% 


15 

2.5% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


161 
26.8% 


600 
100.0% 


122 
20.3% 


5 
% of Total 


715 
54.6% 


36 
2.7% 


14 
1.1% 


243 
18.5% 


52 
4.0% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


250 
19.1% 


1,310 
100.0% 


501 
38.2% 


6 

% of Total 


141 
28.2% 


34 
6.8% 


14 
2.8% 


149 
29.8% 


21 
4.2% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


141 
28.2% 


500 
100.0% 


164 

32.8% 


7 
% of Total 


416 

40.2% 


31 
3.0% 


16 
1.5% 


268 

25.9% 


34 
3.3% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


271 
26.2% 


1,036 
100.0% 


175 
16.9% 


8 
% of Total 


376 
32.4% 


111 
9.6% 


38 
3.3% 


201 
17.3% 


57 
4.9% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


376 

32.4% 


1,159 
100.0% 


374 
32.3% 


9 
% of Total 


545 
47.7% 


30 
2.6% 


13 
1.1% 


253 
22.2% 


30 
2.6% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


271 
23.7% 


1,142 
100.0% 


561 
49.1% 


10 

% of Total 


440 
20.2% 


27 
1.2% 


26 
1.2% 


268 

12.3% 


665 
30.6% 



0.0% 


6 
0.3% 


744 
34.2% 


2,176 
100.0% 


406 

18.7% 


11 
% of Total 


312 
38.6% 


53 
6.6% 


20 
2.5% 


162 
20.0% 


28 
3.5% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


234 
28.9% 


809 
100.0% 


346 

42.8% 


12 

% of Total 


119 

28.4% 


1 
0.2% 


15 
3.6% 


84 
20.0% 


10 
2.4% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


190 
45.3% 


419 
100.0% 


98 

23.4% 


13 
% of Total 


146 
26.2% 


30 
5.4% 


39 
7.0% 


81 
14.5% 


43 

7.7% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


218 
39.1% 


557 
100.0% 


148 
26.6% 


14 
% of Total 


127 
34.6% 


12 
3.3% 


12 
3.3% 


69 

18.8% 


39 
10.6% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


108 
29.4% 


367 
100.0% 


141 
38.4% 


15A 

% of Total 


394 
58.3% 


10 
1.5% 


24 
3.6% 


71 
10.5% 


19 
2.8% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


158 
23.4% 


676 
100.0% 


391 

57.8% 


15B 

% of Total 


72 
30.4% 


6 
2.5% 


16 
6.8% 


40 
16.9% 


9 
3.8% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


94 
39.7% 


237 
100.0% 


42 

17.7% 


16A 

% of Total 


267 
53.6% 


4 
0.8% 


5 
1.0% 


40 

8.0% 


21 
4.2% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


161 
32.3% 


498 
100.0% 


188 

37.8% 


16B 

% of Total 


302 
39.5% 


4 
0.5% 


33 
4.3% 


46 
6.0% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


4 
0.5% 


375 
49.1% 


764 
100.0% 


150 
19.6% 



This table is provided because prosecutorial districts (shown in the map in Part II) do not coincide with superior court districts. 



142 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF MISDEMEANORS IN THE 

SUPERIOR COURTS BY PROSECUTORIAL DISTRICT 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 



Prosecutorial 


Guilty 


Pleas 


Jury 
Trials 


DA Dismissal 


Speedy 

Trial 

Dismissals 


Other 


Total 
Dispositions 


Total 


District 


As 
Charged 


Lesser 

Offense 


Without 
Leave 


With 
Leave 


After Deferred 
Prosecution 


Negotiated 
Pleas 


17A 

% of Total 


392 
39.5% 


40 

4.0% 


16 
1.6% 


156 

15.7% 


75 
7.6% 



0.0% 


3 
0.3% 


311 
31.3% 


993 
100.0% 


332 
33.4% 


17B 

% of Total 


374 
56.2% 


7 
1.1% 


8 
1.2% 


26 
3.9% 


14 
2.1% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


236 

35.5% 


665 
100.0% 


52 
7.8% 


18 

% of Total 


197 
39.6% 


13 
2.6% 


20 
4.0% 


73 
14.7% 


37 
7.4% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


158 

31.7% 


498 
100.0% 


179 
35.9% 


19A 

% of Total 


294 
27.2% 


18 
1.7% 


32 
3.0% 


284 
26.3% 


79 
7.3% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


373 
34.5% 


1,080 
100.0% 


157 
14.5% 


19B 

% of Total 


436 
35.6% 


27 
2.2% 


40 

3.3% 


161 

13.1% 


123 
10.0% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


439 

35.8% 


1,226 
100.0% 


352 
28.7% 


20 

% of Total 


559 
25.0% 


128 
5.7% 


26 
1.2% 


611 

27.3% 


52 
2.3% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


862 
38.5% 


2,238 
100.0% 


778 
34.8% 


21 

% of Total 


930 

42.2% 


78 
3.5% 


17 
0.8% 


383 

17.4% 


131 
5.9% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


665 

30.2% 


2,204 
100.0% 


664 

30.1% 


22 

% of Total 


308 
16.3% 


71 
3.7% 


24 
1.3% 


226 
11.9% 


63 
3.3% 




0.0% 



0.0% 


1,202 
63.5% 


1,894 
100.0% 


212 

11.2% 


23 

% of Total 


121 

18.1% 


11 
1.6% 


24 
3.6% 


64 
9.6% 


4 
0.6% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


444 
66.5% 


668 

100.0% 


67 
10.0% 


24 

% of Total 


50 
22.3% 


14 
6.3% 


24 
10.7% 


75 
33.5% 


14 
6.3% 


1 

0.4% 



0.0% 


46 
20.5% 


224 
100.0% 


83 

37.1% 


25 

% of Total 


596 

29.7% 


64 

3.2% 


28 
1.4% 


359 

17.9% 


116 
5.8% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


847 
42.1% 


2,010 
100.0% 


412 
20.5% 


26 

% of Total 


69 
3.9% 


381 
21.3% 


70 
3.9% 


756 
42.3% 


51 
2.9% 



0.0% 




0.0% 


460 

25.7% 


1,787 
100.0% 


383 
21.4% 


27A 
% of Total 


297 

32.7% 


12 
1.3% 


69 
7.6% 


252 

27.8% 


92 
10.1% 



0.0% 


3 
0.3% 


182 

20.1% 


907 
100.0% 


231 
25.5% 


27B 

% of Total 


188 
34.9% 


10 
1.9% 


31 
5.8% 


100 

18.6% 


7 
1.3% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


202 

37.5% 


538 
100.0% 


71 
13.2% 


28 

% of Total 


178 
44.7% 


3 
0.8% 


9 
2.3% 


66 
16.6% 


35 
8.8% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


107 
26.9% 


398 
100.0% 


127 
31.9% 


29 

% of Total 


289 

33.7% 


15 
1.7% 


33 
3.8% 


151 
17.6% 


38 
4.4% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


332 
38.7% 


858 
100.0% 


132 
15.4% 


30 

% of Total 


125 

22.5% 


44 
7.9% 


53 
9.5% 


139 

25.0% 


12 
2.2% 



0.0% 



0.0% 


183 
32.9% 


556 

100.0% 


260 
46.8% 


State Totals 
% of Total 


11,926 
33.0% 


1,590 
4.4% 


950 
2.6% 


6,716 
18.6% 


2,194 
6.1% 


1 

0.0% 


16 
0.0% 


12,779 
35.3% 


36,172 
100.0% 


9,624 
26.6% 



This table is provided because prosecutorial districts (shown in the map in Part II) do not coincide with superior court districts. 



143 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 











Ages of Pending Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 






0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 1 






















Camden 


Pel 


4 








4 








8 


151.3 


131.0 




Mis 


9 


2 





1 


1 


1 


14 


151.1 


66.0 


Chowan 


Fel 


35 


33 


7 


10 


6 


2 


93 


135.1 


108.0 




Mis 


34 


20 


19 


20 


12 


1 


106 


169.6 


115.0 


Currituck 


Fel 


9 


3 


4 


1 


9 


1 


27 


296.9 


128.0 




Mis 


23 


10 


1 


6 


1 


1 


42 


108.8 


49.5 


Dare 


Fel 


32 


4 


10 


38 


3 


5 


92 


193.1 


178.0 




Mis 


76 


14 


11 


25 


6 





132 


114.9 


67.0 


Gates 


Fel 


15 





1 











16 


48.6 


39.0 




Mis 


17 





3 











20 


71.5 


51.0 


Pasquotank 


Fel 


53 


17 


6 


29 


2 





107 


119.8 


93.0 




Mis 


84 


20 


8 


24 


2 





138 


88.3 


56.0 


Perquimans 


Fel 


18 


6 


23 


16 


3 


1 


67 


170.6 


151.0 




Mis 


36 


27 


7 


16 


4 


1 


91 


140.0 


107.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


166 


63 


51 


98 


23 


9 


410 


157.5 


114.5 






40.5% 


15.4% 


12.4% 


23.9% 


5.6% 


2.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


279 


93 


49 


92 


26 


4 


543 


121.9 


85.0 






51.4% 


17.1% 


9.0% 


16.9% 


4.8% 


0.7% 


100.0% 






District 2 






















Beaufort 


Fel 


160 


14 


12 


20 





2 


208 


88.3 


44.0 




Mis 


61 


8 


12 


4 


2 





87 


78.6 


51.0 


Hyde 


Fel 


11 





6 











17 


69.9 


65.0 




Mis 


6 


6 


4 


2 








18 


91.0 


95.0 


Martin 


Fel 


19 


1 


7 


7 








34 


115.1 


69.5 




Mis 


9 


4 


4 


5 


1 





23 


125.5 


102.0 


Tyrrell 


Fel 


3 

















3 


46.0 


46.0 




Mis 


11 





1 


1 








13 


64.5 


39.0 


Washington 


Fel 


16 


23 


4 


9 








52 


99.5 


92.0 




Mis 


17 





6 


1 








24 


69.1 


33.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


209 


38 


29 


36 





2 


314 


91.7 


52.0 






66.6% 


12.1% 


9.2% 


11.5% 


0.0% 


0.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


104 


18 


27 


13 


3 





165 


84.0 


59.0 






63.0% 


10.9% 


16.4% 


7.9% 


1.8% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 3A 






















Pitt 


Fel 


266 


160 


65 


128 


6 





625 


116.6 


109.0 






42.6% 


25.6% 


10.4% 


20.5% 


1.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


253 


13 


32 


91 


20 





409 


107.8 


45.0 






61.9% 


3.2% 


7.8% 


22.2% 


4.9% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







144 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 











Ages of Pending Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 






0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 3B 






















Carteret 


Fel 


68 


52 


14 


67 


6 





207 


138.0 


101.0 




Mis 


88 


8 


7 


7 


2 





112 


74.4 


36.0 


Craven 


Fel 


145 


19 


9 


39 


17 


1 


230 


118.4 


38.0 




Mis 


90 


6 


3 


17 


2 





118 


75.6 


28.5 


Pamlico 


Fel 


9 





9 


6 


4 





28 


187.0 


151.0 




Mis 


1 


1 


8 


3 


1 





14 


202.5 


175.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


222 


71 


32 


112 


27 


1 


465 


131.3 


93.0 






47.7% 


15.3% 


6.9% 


24.1% 


5.8% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


179 


15 


18 


27 


5 





244 


82.3 


36.5 






73.4% 


6.1% 


7.4% 


11.1% 


2.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 4A 






















Duplin 


Fel 


60 


1 


13 


3 








77 


50.4 


22.0 




Mis 


9 


1 


1 


3 








14 


109.8 


54.5 


Jones 


Fel 





10 


1 


6 








17 


176.1 


109.0 




Mis 


7 


3 





1 








11 


85.2 


31.0 


Sampson 


Fel 


102 


13 


1 





1 





117 


47.1 


35.0 




Mis 


15 

















15 


26.0 


24.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


162 


24 


15 


9 


1 





211 


58.7 


35.0 






76.8% 


11.4% 


7.1% 


4.3% 


0.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


31 


4 


1 


4 








40 


71.6 


33.0 






77.5% 


10.0% 


2.5% 


10.0% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 4B 






















Onslow 


Fel 


153 


19 


9 


24 








205 


68.8 


30.0 






74.6% 


9.3% 


4.4% 


11.7% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


42 


5 


1 


9 








57 


64.8 


29.0 






73.7% 


8.8% 


1.8% 


15.8% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 5 






















New Hanover 


Fel 


288 


84 


96 


84 


28 


12 


592 


140.5 


94.0 




Mis 


156 


36 


35 


31 


28 


4 


290 


144.8 


86.0 


Pender 


Fel 


55 


7 


683 


8 


9 


2 


764 


134.6 


130.0 




Mis 


14 


10 


5 


4 


4 


2 


39 


173.2 


106.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


343 


91 


779 


92 


37 


14 


1,356 


137.2 


130.0 






25.3% 


6.7% 


57.4% 


6.8% 


2.7% 


1.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


170 


46 


40 


35 


32 


6 


329 


148.1 


86.0 






51.7% 


14.0% 


12.2% 


10.6% 


9.7% 


1.8% 


100.0% 






District 6A 






















Halifax 


Fel 


103 


9 


23 


27 


13 





175 


138.2 


88.0 






58.9% 


5.1% 


13.1% 


15.4% 


7.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


59 


8 


10 


22 


13 





112 


151.2 


86.0 






52.7% 


7.1% 


8.9% 


19.6% 


11.6% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







145 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 











Ages of Pending Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 






0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 6B 






















Berue 


Fel 


19 


1 


3 


4 


5 





32 


159.3 


71.0 




Mis 


13 


3 


1 


4 


4 


1 


26 


184.3 


87.0 


Hertford 


Fel 


9 


7 


14 


14 


6 


1 


51 


196.1 


169.0 




Mis 


17 


1 


5 


19 


1 





43 


129.6 


141.0 


Northampton 


Fel 


17 


35 


58 


30 


10 





150 


175.0 


172.0 




Mis 


8 


2 


4 


15 


4 





33 


224.7 


211.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


45 


43 


75 


48 


21 


1 


233 


177.5 


169.0 






19.3% 


18.5% 


32.2% 


20.6% 


9.0% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


38 


6 


10 


38 


9 


1 


102 


174.3 


142.5 






37.3% 


5.9% 


9.8% 


37.3% 


8.8% 


1.0% 


100.0% 






District 7A 






















Nash 


Fel 


128 


10 


39 


15 


2 





194 


89.7 


88.0 






66.0% 


5.2% 


20.1% 


7.7% 


1.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


54 


21 


1 


15 


3 





94 


103.1 


64.0 






57.4% 


22.3% 


1.1% 


16.0% 


3.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 7B-C 






















Edgecombe 


Fel 


94 


34 


29 


22 


12 


2 


193 


142.0 


115.0 




Mis 


85 


31 


21 


29 


9 


3 


178 


139.4 


101.5 


Wilson 


Fel 


77 


52 


30 


48 


11 


7 


225 


174.9 


93.0 




Mis 


32 


14 


20 


12 


16 


3 


97 


211.6 


127.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


171 


86 


59 


70 


23 


9 


418 


159.7 


93.0 






40.9% 


20.6% 


14.1% 


16.7% 


5.5% 


2.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


117 


45 


41 


41 


25 


6 


275 


164.9 


115.0 






42.5% 


16.4% 


14.9% 


14.9% 


9.1% 


2.2% 


100.0% 






District 8A 






















Greene 


Fel 


28 





9 


43 








80 


159.6 


242.0 




Mis 


12 


1 


1 


6 


2 





22 


133.7 


57.0 


Lenoir 


Fel 


63 


16 


6 


7 








92 


67.1 


59.0 




Mis 


33 


5 


3 


3 








44 


70.6 


63.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


91 


16 


15 


50 








172 


110.2 


72.0 






52.9% 


9.3% 


8.7% 


29.1% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


45 


6 


4 


9 


2 





66 


91.6 


63.0 






68.2% 


9.1% 


6.1% 


13.6% 


3.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 8B 






















Wayne 


Fel 


48 


19 


18 


46 





1 


132 


140.9 


120.0 






36.4% 


14.4% 


13.6% 


34.8% 


0.0% 


0.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


121 


21 


38 


42 


10 


3 


235 


136.1 


85.0 






51.5% 


8.9% 


16.2% 


17.9% 


4.3% 


1.3% 


100.0% 







146 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 











Ages of Pending Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 






0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 9 






















Franklin 


Fel 


47 


6 


11 


13 


9 


2 


88 


155.0 


71.0 




Mis 


41 


10 


14 


24 


11 


5 


105 


222.5 


127.0 


Granville 


Fel 


284 


14 


14 


10 


18 





340 


61.7 


29.0 




Mis 


33 


2 


9 


23 


8 


2 


77 


199.9 


137.0 


Person 


Fel 


101 


4 


16 


21 


8 


2 


152 


129.1 


88.0 




Mis 


53 


3 


13 


12 


14 


2 


97 


182.0 


88.0 


Vance 


Fel 


207 


34 


60 


32 


32 


20 


385 


173.0 


86.0 




Mis 


109 


16 


55 


37 


12 


9 


238 


173.0 


114.0 


Warren 


Fel 


20 


5 


18 


17 


2 


1 


63 


152.9 


135.0 




Mis 


24 





19 


15 


10 


8 


76 


229.0 


140.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


659 


63 


119 


93 


69 


25 


1,028 


126.9 


46.0 






64.1% 


6.1% 


11.6% 


9.0% 


6.7% 


2.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


260 


31 


110 


111 


55 


26 


593 


193.9 


123.0 






43.8% 


5.2% 


18.5% 


18.7% 


9.3% 


4.4% 


100.0% 






District 10A-D 






















Wake 


Fel 


664 


152 


160 


131 


91 


7 


1,205 


128.7 


71.0 






55.1% 


12.6% 


13.3% 


10.9% 


7.6% 


0.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


476 


53 


54 


47 


18 


3 


651 


81.2 


43.0 






73.1% 


8.1% 


8.3% 


7.2% 


2.8% 


0.5% 


100.0% 






District 11 






















Harnett 


Fel 


97 


9 


8 


13 


10 


7 


144 


147.9 


66.0 




Mis 


18 


3 


4 


5 


3 


4 


37 


216.7 


95.0 


Johnston 


Fel 


66 


3 


3 


1 


2 





75 


55.6 


28.0 




Mis 


38 


2 


3 


2 


1 





46 


66.1 


45.5 


Lee 


Fel 


39 


5 


18 


8 





1 


71 


96.0 


65.0 




Mis 


22 


2 


14 











38 


83.2 


79.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


202 


17 


29 


22 


12 


8 


290 


111.3 


53.0 






69.7% 


5.9% 


10.0% 


7.6% 


4.1% 


2.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


78 


7 


21 


7 


4 


4 


121 


117.5 


66.0 






64.5% 


5.8% 


17.4% 


5.8% 


3.3% 


3.3% 


100.0% 






District 12A-C 






















Cumberland 


Fel 


232 


84 


73 


131 


66 


6 


592 


168.4 


113.5 






39.2% 


14.2% 


12.3% 


22.1% 


11.1% 


1.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


55 


2 


14 


9 


5 


1 


86 


123.1 


83.0 






64.0% 


2.3% 


16.3% 


10.5% 


5.8% 


1.2% 


100.0% 







147 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 











Ages of Per 


iding Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 

Age 


Median 






0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 13 






















Bladen 


Fel 


34 


12 


6 


1 


1 





54 


75.3 


73.0 




Mis 


43 


2 


12 


1 








58 


63.4 


35.0 


Brunswick 


Fel 


160 


9 


15 


23 


1 


12 


220 


123.3 


50.0 




Mis 


13 





3 


1 


2 





19 


114.3 


58.0 


Columbus 


Fel 


83 


47 


23 


43 


10 


1 


207 


136.3 


92.0 




Mis 


44 


5 


32 


17 


4 





102 


135.9 


135.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


277 


68 


44 


67 


12 


13 


481 


123.5 


81.0 






57.6% 


14.1% 


9.1% 


13.9% 


2.5% 


2.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


100 


7 


47 


19 


6 





179 


110.1 


73.0 






55.9% 


3.9% 


26.3% 


10.6% 


3.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 14A-B 






















Durham 


Fel 


560 


39 


120 


147 


75 


45 


986 


177.9 


84.0 






56.8% 


4.0% 


12.2% 


14.9% 


7.6% 


4.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


61 


20 


11 


29 


16 


55 


192 


448.6 


211.0 






31.8% 


10.4% 


5.7% 


15.1% 


8.3% 


28.6% 


100.0% 






District 15A 






















Alamance 


Fel 


164 


121 


26 


65 








376 


104.3 


106.0 






43.6% 


32.2% 


6.9% 


17.3% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


111 


9 


9 


19 


1 


2 


151 


90.1 


52.0 






73.5% 


6.0% 


6.0% 


12.6% 


0.7% 


1.3% 


100.0% 






District 15B 






















Chatham 


Fel 


54 


31 


3 


15 


2 





105 


99.8 


51.0 




Mis 


26 


2 


2 


4 


1 





35 


78.7 


56.0 


Orange 


Fel 


112 


115 


35 


9 


4 


2 


277 


96.0 


94.0 




Mis 


33 


1 


5 


2 








41 


60.5 


44.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


166 


146 


38 


24 


6 


2 


382 


97.0 


94.0 






43.5% 


38.2% 


9.9% 


6.3% 


1.6% 


0.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


59 


3 


7 


6 


1 





76 


68.9 


45.5 






77.6% 


3.9% 


9.2% 


7.9% 


1.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 16A 






















Hoke 


Fel 


34 


1 


4 


3 


1 





43 


94.7 


88.0 




Mis 


26 


2 


2 


1 


1 





32 


57.5 


10.0 


Scotland 


Fel 


44 


39 


2 


22 


24 


3 


134 


194.0 


99.0 




Mis 


31 


4 


6 


15 


18 


13 


87 


324.1 


268.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


78 


40 


6 


25 


25 


3 


177 


169.9 


95.0 






44.1% 


22.6% 


3.4% 


14.1% 


14.1% 


1.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


57 


6 


8 


16 


19 


13 


119 


252.4 


101.0 






47.9% 


5.0% 


6.7% 


13.4% 


16.0% 


10.9% 


100.0% 






District 16B 






















Robeson 


Fel 


480 


U 


171 


148 


63 


8 


954 


144.9 


88.0 






50.3% 


8.8% 


17.9% 


15.5% 


6.6% 


0.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


195 


35 


62 


83 


72 


4 


451 


182.6 


116.0 






43.2% 


7.8% 


13.7% 


18.4% 


16.0% 


0.9% 


100.0% 







148 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 

CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 











Ages of Pending Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 

Age 


Median 






0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 17A 






















Caswell 


Fel 


47 


1 


4 


5 


1 





58 


81.1 


46.5 




Mis 


31 


4 





7 








42 


77.9 


43.0 


Rockingham 


Fel 


423 


217 


100 


54 


18 


1 


813 


104.1 


86.0 




Mis 


223 


56 


55 


28 


7 


1 


370 


93.9 


72.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


470 


218 


104 


59 


19 


1 


871 


102.6 


78.0 






54.0% 


25.0% 


11.9% 


6.8% 


2.2% 


0.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


254 


60 


55 


35 


7 


1 


412 


92.3 


65.5 






61.7% 


14.6% 


13.3% 


8.5% 


1.7% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 17B 






















Stokes 


Fel 


53 


12 


7 


4 








76 


81.1 


70.0 




Mis 


63 


8 


9 


4 


2 





86 


80.8 


63.0 


Surry 


Fel 


127 


6 


33 


11 


6 





183 


83.8 


44.0 




Mis 


87 


15 


18 


9 


1 





130 


77.6 


51.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


180 


18 


40 


15 


6 





259 


83.0 


49.0 






69.5% 


6.9% 


15.4% 


5.8% 


2.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


150 


23 


27 


13 


3 





216 


78.9 


56.0 






69.4% 


10.6% 


12.5% 


6.0% 


1.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 18A-E 






















Guilford 


Fel 


1,103 


98 


178 


198 


90 


43 


1,710 


129.8 


71.0 






64.5% 


5.7% 


10.4% 


11.6% 


5.3% 


2.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


88 


10 


19 


18 


4 


3 


142 


116.1 


55.5 






62.0% 


7.0% 


13.4% 


12.7% 


2.8% 


2.1% 


100.0% 






District 19A 






















Cabarrus 


Fel 


194 


38 


29 


29 


15 


4 


309 


102.6 


49.0 






62.8% 


12.3% 


9.4% 


9.4% 


4.9% 


1.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


174 


26 


18 


7 


17 


5 


247 


110.2 


45.0 






70.4% 


10.5% 


7.3% 


2.8% 


6.9% 


2.0% 


100.0% 






District 19B 






















Montgomery 


Fel 


21 


6 


9 


24 


5 





65 


169.2 


128.0 




Mis 


30 


3 


12 


16 


3 


12 


76 


305.2 


136.0 


Randolph 


Fel 


247 


57 


45 


117 


71 


8 


545 


172.0 


106.0 




Mis 


109 


65 


39 


44 


23 


1 


281 


141.2 


93.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


268 


63 


54 


141 


76 


8 


610 


171.7 


113.0 






43.9% 


10.3% 


8.9% 


23.1% 


12.5% 


1.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


139 


68 


51 


60 


26 


13 


357 


176.1 


100.0 






38.9% 


19.0% 


14.3% 


16.8% 


7.3% 


3.6% 


100.0% 






District 19C 






















Rowan 


Fel 


125 


34 


85 


49 


6 





299 


119.1 


92.0 






41.8% 


11.4% 


28.4% 


16.4% 


2.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


76 


18 


14 


34 


8 


1 


151 


135.7 


79.0 






50.3% 


11.9% 


9.3% 


22.5% 


5.3% 


0.7% 


100.0% 







149 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 

CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 











Ages of Pei 


iding Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 

Age 


Median 






0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 20 A 






















Anson 


Fel 


17 


2 


23 


11 


1 





54 


149.2 


142.0 




Mis 


35 


15 


7 


4 


2 





63 


90.8 


64.0 


Moore 


Fel 


143 


8 


17 


13 


6 


8 


195 


117.6 


50.0 




Mis 


55 


10 


9 


15 


13 


6 


108 


183.0 


87.0 


Richmond 


Fel 


47 


9 


20 


4 


19 


4 


103 


190.1 


101.0 




Mis 


77 


4 


1 


10 


7 


4 


103 


125.7 


30.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


207 


19 


60 


28 


26 


12 


352 


143.6 


68.0 






58.8% 


5.4% 


17.0% 


8.0% 


7.4% 


3.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


167 


29 


17 


29 


22 


10 


274 


140.3 


64.5 






60.9% 


10.6% 


6.2% 


10.6% 


8.0% 


3.6% 


100.0% 






District 20B 






















Stanly 


Fel 


89 


6 


27 


48 


72 





242 


231.8 


168.0 




Mis 


94 


7 


43 


24 


17 





185 


132.3 


86.0 


Union 


Fel 


93 


1 


24 


10 


4 


8 


140 


181.9 


60.0 




Mis 


87 


9 


13 


6 


8 


22 


145 


296.1 


59.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


182 


7 


51 


58 


76 


8 


382 


213.5 


126.5 






47.6% 


1.8% 


13.4% 


15.2% 


19.9% 


2.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


181 


16 


56 


30 


25 


22 


330 


204.3 


70.5 






54.8% 


4.8% 


17.0% 


9.1% 


7.6% 


6.7% 


100.0% 






District 21A-D 






















Forsyth 


Fel 


629 


109 


158 


126 


28 


2 


1,052 


98.2 


60.0 






59.8% 


10.4% 


15.0% 


12.0% 


2.7% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


378 


74 


97 


94 


44 


10 


697 


131.2 


79.0 






54.2% 


10.6% 


13.9% 


13.5% 


6.3% 


1.4% 


100.0% 






District 22 






















Alexander 


Fel 


89 








2 


1 


2 


94 


38.9 


7.0 




Mis 


48 


8 


7 


3 


6 





72 


105.9 


56.0 


Davidson 


Fel 


35 


18 


11 


21 


1 





86 


111.4 


113.0 




Mis 


64 


8 


9 


16 








97 


80.5 


53.0 


Davie 


Fel 


36 


21 


10 


1 








68 


74.4 


53.0 




Mis 


22 


2 


3 


12 


4 





43 


150.0 


85.0 


Iredell 


Fel 


140 


29 


100 


33 


4 





306 


106.8 


93.0 




Mis 


154 


25 


18 


47 


1 





245 


98.8 


66.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


300 


68 


121 


57 


6 


2 


554 


92.0 


72.0 






54.2% 


12.3% 


21.8% 


10.3% 


1.1% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


288 


43 


37 


78 


11 





457 


100.9 


59.0 






63.0% 


9.4% 


8.1% 


17.1% 


2.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







150 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 

CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 











Ages of Pending Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 






0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 23 






















Alleghany 


Fel 


2 





6 


1 


2 





11 


210.2 


178.0 




Mis 


10 


1 


5 


6 


3 





25 


149.4 


121.0 


Ashe 


Fel 


16 


7 


6 


11 


11 





5'. 


223.9 


150.0 




Mis 


17 


1 


22 


27 


9 


2 


78 


221.6 


177.0 


Wilkes 


Fel 


51 


7 


16 


24 


7 


2 


107 


168.5 


93.0 




Mis 


69 


18 


10 


21 


17 


7 


142 


192.0 


91.0 


Yadkin 


Fel 


95 


7 


7 


17 


2 





128 


85.2 


58.0 




Mis 


26 


7 


5 


12 


14 





64 


180.7 


114.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


164 


21 


35 


53 


22 


2 


297 


143.6 


70.0 






55.2% 


7.1% 


11.8% 


17.8% 


7.4% 


0.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


122 


27 


42 


66 


43 


9 


309 


193.7 


130.0 






39.5% 


8.7% 


13.6% 


21.4% 


13.9% 


2.9% 


100.0% 






District 24 






















Avery 


Fel 


17 





19 


6 


7 





49 


171.7 


147.0 




Mis 


12 


3 


2 


2 








19 


84.5 


72.0 


Madison 


Fel 


20 


11 


15 


6 


25 





77 


267.9 


161.0 




Mis 


4 





7 


1 


1 





13 


161.1 


161.0 


Mitchell 


Fel 


4 





22 


2 


10 


2 


40 


279.3 


177.0 




Mis 


8 


6 


4 


11 


2 


1 


32 


204.6 


155.0 


Watauga 


Fel 


69 


1 


46 


11 


6 


10 


143 


179.2 


141.0 




Mis 


26 


1 


5 


4 


3 





39 


109.5 


60.0 


Yancey 


Fel 


8 


8 


3 


8 


2 





29 


154.8 


94.0 




Mis 


10 





14 


5 


4 





33 


176.2 


164.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


118 


20 


105 


33 


50 


12 


338 


208.0 


161.0 






34.9% 


5.9% 


31.1% 


9.8% 


14.8% 


3.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


60 


10 


32 


23 


10 


1 


136 


149.5 


105.0 






44.1% 


7.4% 


23.5% 


16.9% 


7.4% 


0.7% 


100.0% 






District 25 A 






















Burke 


Fel 


81 


22 


19 


12 


70 


8 


212 


282.9 


130.0 




Mis 


123 


23 


22 


20 


11 


1 


200 


114.0 


65.0 


Caldwell 


Fel 


193 


50 


103 


63 


19 


5 


433 


138.8 


120.0 




Mis 


199 


25 


55 


47 


26 


10 


362 


150.1 


75.5 


District Totals 


Fel 


274 


72 


122 


75 


89 


13 


645 


186.2 


120.0 






42.5% 


11.2% 


18.9% 


11.6% 


13.8% 


2.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


322 


48 


77 


67 


37 


11 


562 


137.2 


72.0 






57.3% 


8.5% 


13.7% 


11.9% 


6.6% 


2.0% 


100.0% 






District 25B 






















Catawba 


Fel 


245 


29 


88 


144 


104 


23 


633 


223.7 


143.0 






38.7% 


4.6% 


13.9% 


22.7% 


16.4% 


3.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


164 


45 


91 


116 


64 


8 


488 


184.3 


129.0 






33.6% 


9.2% 


18.6% 


23.8% 


13.1% 


1.6% 


100.0% 







151 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 

CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 











Ages of Pei 


iding Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 






0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 26A-C 






















Mecklenburg 


Fel 


683 


58 


178 


X6 


29 


17 


1,051 


111.2 


59.0 






65.0% 


5.5% 


16.9% 


8.2% 


2.8% 


1.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


366 


45 


70 


56 


25 


28 


590 


151.6 


65.0 






62.0% 


7.6% 


11.9% 


9.5% 


4.2% 


4.7% 


100.0% 






District 27A 






















Gaston 


Fel 


190 


194 


81 


53 


56 


3 


577 


139.5 


93.0 






32.9% 


33.6% 


14.0% 


9.2% 


9.7% 


0.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


102 


59 


52 


79 


70 


14 


376 


229.5 


142.0 






27.1% 


15.7% 


13.8% 


21.0% 


18.6% 


3.7% 


100.0% 






District 27B 






















Cleveland 


Fel 


101 


144 


35 


68 


28 


3 


379 


160.9 


116.0 




Mis 


67 


14 


15 


47 


9 


1 


153 


146.4 


100.0 


Lincoln 


Fel 


95 


42 


9 


38 


8 


2 


194 


140.8 


93.0 




Mis 


13 


2 


9 


13 


12 


1 


50 


256.0 


193.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


196 


186 


44 


106 


36 


5 


573 


154.1 


114.0 






34.2% 


32.5% 


7.7% 


18.5% 


6.3% 


0.9% 


100.0% 








Mis 


80 


16 


24 


60 


21 


2 


203 


173.4 


137.0 






39.4% 


7.9% 


11.8% 


29.6% 


10.3% 


1.0% 


100.0% 






District 28 






















Buncombe 


Fel 


228 


47 


57 


13 


4 


2 


351 


84.3 


64.0 






65.0% 


13.4% 


16.2% 


3.7% 


1.1% 


0.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


120 


2 


10 


4 








136 


38.6 


8.0 






88.2% 


1.5% 


7.4% 


2.9% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 29 






















Henderson 


Fel 


97 


51 


179 


128 


52 


12 


519 


201.4 


150.0 




Mis 


59 


27 


54 


32 


1 





173 


120.5 


121.0 


McDowell 


Fel 


13 


32 


25 


39 


14 


5 


128 


232.6 


153.5 




Mis 


70 


23 


36 


32 


11 


2 


174 


151.1 


113.0 


Polk 


Fel 


9 


X 


8 


23 


16 





64 


295.3 


352.0 




Mis 


11 


3 


9 


11 


2 





36 


160.4 


166.5 


Rutherford 


Fel 


81 


X 


22 


37 


19 


5 


172 


184.5 


113.0 




Mis 


95 


24 


19 


20 


20 


6 


184 


167.7 


85.0 


Transylvania 


Fel 


35 


47 


11 


31 


50 


15 


189 


325.0 


249.0 




Mis 


5 


X 


3 


17 


11 


3 


47 


315.9 


262.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


235 


146 


245 


258 


151 


37 


1,072 


229.8 


150.0 






21.9% 


13.6% 


22.9% 


24.1% 


14.1% 


3.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


240 


85 


121 


112 


45 


11 


614 


160.6 


113.0 






39.1% 


13.8% 


19.7% 


18.2% 


7.3% 


1.8% 


100.0% 







152 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 

CASES PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 











Ages of Pei 


iding Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 30A 






















Cherokee 


Fel 


74 


56 


14 


40 


5 


15 


204 


231.6 


102.0 




Mis 


23 


7 


20 


9 


3 


13 


75 


345.1 


143.0 


Clay 


Fel 


1 


3 


1 


7 








12 


203.6 


277.0 




Mis 


3 


4 





1 








8 


110.9 


106.0 


Graham 


Fel 


32 








2 


14 





48 


200.1 


10.0 




Mis 














3 





3 


500.3 


400.0 


Macon 


Fel 


44 





2 


7 


2 





55 


93.8 


46.0 




Mis 


9 


1 


1 


2 


2 





15 


149.7 


53.0 


Swain 


Fel 


129 


6 


3 


2 


3 





143 


38.4 


15.0 




Mis 


9 


2 














11 


42.2 


30.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


280 


65 


20 


58 


24 


15 


462 


151.4 


46.0 






60.6% 


14.1% 


4.3% 


12.6% 


5.2% 


3.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


44 


14 


21 


12 


8 


13 


112 


276.6 


107.5 






39.3% 


12.5% 


18.8% 


10.7% 


7.1% 


11.6% 


100.0% 






District 30B 






















Haywood 


Fel 


68 


8 


21 


13 


1 





111 


95.1 


71.0 




Mis 


42 


8 


14 


16 





1 


81 


114.4 


81.0 


Jackson 


Fel 


76 





35 


24 


42 


2 


179 


231.3 


151.0 




Mis 


15 


1 


7 


5 





1 


29 


153.6 


81.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


144 


8 


56 


37 


43 


2 


290 


179.1 


103.5 






49.7% 


2.8% 


19.3% 


12.8% 


14.8% 


0.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


57 


9 


21 


21 





2 


110 


124.8 


81.0 






51.8% 


8.2% 


19.1% 


19.1% 


0.0% 


1.8% 


100.0% 






State Totals 


Fel 


12,004 


2,981 


3,906 


3,284 


1,528 


365 


24,068 


140.2 


91.0 






49.9% 


12.4% 


16.2% 


13.6% 


6.3% 


1.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


6,516 


1,201 


1,567 


1,798 


835 


292 


12,209 


146.6 


79.0 






53.4% 


9.8% 


12.8% 


14.7% 


6.8% 


2.4% 


100.0% 







153 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) CASES PENDING 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS BY PROSECUTORIAL DISTRICT 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 

Prosecutorial Ages of Pending Cases (Days) 



District 

1 



3 A 



3B 



Fel 

% of Total 

Mis 

% of Total 

Fel 

% of Total 

Mis 

% of Total 

Fel 

% of Total 

Mis 

% of Total 

Fel 

% of Total 

Mis 

% of Total 

Fel 

% of Total 

Mis 

% of Total 

Fel 
% of Total 

Mis 
% of Total 

Fel 

% of Total 

Mis 

% of Total 

Fel 

% of Total 

Mis 

% of Total 

Fel 

% of Total 

Mis 

% of Total 



0-90 

166 
40.5% 

279 
51.4% 

209 
66.6% 

104 
63.0% 

266 

42.6% 
253 
61.9% 

222 
47.7% 

179 
73.4% 

315 

75.7% 

73 
75.3% 

343 
25.3% 

170 
51.7% 

148 
36.3% 

97 
45.3% 

299 

48.9% 

171 

46.3% 

139 

45.7% 

166 

55.1% 



91-120 121-180 181-365 366-730 



Total 

>730 Pending 



63 
15.4% 

93 
17.1% 

38 
12.1% 

18 
10.9% 

160 

25.6% 

13 

3.2% 

71 

15.3% 

15 

6.1% 

43 
10.3% 

9 
9.3% 

91 

6.7% 

46 

14.0% 

52 

12.7% 

14 

6.5% 

% 
15.7% 

66 
17.9% 

35 

11.5% 

27 

9.0% 



51 

12.4% 

49 

9.0% 

29 

9.2% 

27 

16.4% 

65 

10.4% 

32 

7.8% 

32 
6.9% 

18 
7.4% 

24 

5.8% 

2 
2.1% 

779 
57.4% 

40 
12.2% 

98 

24.0% 
20 
9.3% 

98 
16.0% 

42 
11.4% 

33 
10.9% 

42 
14.0% 



98 
23.9% 

92 
16.9% 

36 

11.5% 

13 

7.9% 

128 
20.5% 

91 
22.2% 

112 
24.1% 

27 
11.1% 

33 

7.9% 

13 

13.4% 

92 

6.8% 

35 

10.6% 

75 
18.4% 

60 
28.0% 

85 

13.9% 

56 

15.2% 

% 
31.6% 

51 
16.9% 



23 
5.6% 

26 
4.8% 


0.0% 

3 
1.8% 

6 
1.0% 
20 
4.9% 

27 
5.8% 

5 
2.0% 

1 
0.2% 


0.0% 

37 
2.7% 

32 
9.7% 

34 

8.3% 

22 

10.3% 

25 
4.1% 

28 
7.6% 



0.0% 

12 

4.0% 



9 
2.2% 

4 
0.7% 

2 
0.6% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


0.0% 

1 
0.2% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


0.0% 

14 
1.0% 

6 
1.8% 

1 
0.2% 

1 
0.5% 

9 
1.5% 

6 
1.6% 

1 
0.3% 

3 
1.0% 



410 
100.0% 

543 
100.0% 

314 
100.0% 

165 
100.0% 

625 
100.0% 

409 
100.0% 

465 
100.0% 

244 
100.0% 

416 
100.0% 

97 
100.0% 

1,356 
100.0% 

329 
100.0% 

408 
100.0% 

214 
100.0% 

612 
100.0% 

369 
100.0% 

304 
100.0% 

301 
100.0% 



Mean 
Age 

157.5 
121.9 

91.7 
84.0 

116.6 
107.8 

131.3 
82.3 

63.7 
67.6 

137.2 
148.1 

160.6 
162.2 

137.5 
149.1 

123.5 
126.4 



Median 
Age 

114.5 
85.0 

52.0 
59.0 

109.0 
45.0 

93.0 
36.5 

30.0 
31.0 

130.0 
86.0 

123.0 
99.0 

93.0 
102.0 

93.0 
79.0 



This table is provided because prosecutorial districts (shown in the map in Part II) do not coincide with superior court districts. 



154 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) CASES PENDING 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS BY PROSECUTORIAL DISTRICT 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 



Prosecutorial 






Ages of Pending Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 


District 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


9 


Fel 


659 


63 


119 


93 


69 


25 


1,028 


126.9 


46.0 




% of Total 


64.1% 


6.1% 


11.6% 


9.0% 


6.7% 


2.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


260 


31 


110 


111 


55 


26 


593 


193.9 


123.0 




% of Total 


43.8% 


5.2% 


18.5% 


18.7% 


9.3% 


4.4% 


100.0% 






10 


Fel 


664 


152 


160 


131 


91 


7 


1,205 


128.7 


71.0 




% of Total 


55.1% 


12.6% 


13.3% 


10.9% 


7.6% 


0.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


476 


53 


54 


47 


18 


3 


651 


81.2 


43.0 




% of Total 


73.1% 


8.1% 


8.3% 


7.2% 


2.8% 


0.5% 


100.0% 






11 


Fel 


202 


17 


29 


22 


12 


8 


290 


111.3 


53.0 




% of Total 


69.7% 


5.9% 


10.0% 


7.6% 


4.1% 


2.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


78 


7 


21 


7 


4 


4 


121 


117.5 


66.0 




% of Total 


64.5% 


5.8% 


17.4% 


5.8% 


3.3% 


3.3% 


100.0% 






12 


Fel 


232 


84 


73 


131 


66 


6 


592 


168.4 


113.5 




% of Total 


39.2% 


14.2% 


12.3% 


22.1% 


11.1% 


1.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


55 


2 


14 


9 


5 


1 


86 


123.1 


83.0 




% of Total 


64.0% 


2.3% 


16.3% 


10.5% 


5.8% 


1.2% 


100.0% 






13 


Fel 


277 


68 


44 


67 


12 


13 


481 


123.5 


81.0 




% of Total 


57.6% 


14.1% 


9.1% 


13.9% 


2.5% 


2.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


100 


7 


47 


19 


6 





179 


110.1 


73.0 




% of Total 


55.9% 


3.9% 


26.3% 


10.6% 


3.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






14 


Fel 


560 


39 


120 


147 


75 


45 


986 


177.9 


84.0 




% of Total 


56.8% 


4.0% 


12.2% 


14.9% 


7.6% 


4.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


61 


20 


11 


29 


16 


55 


192 


448.6 


211.0 




% of Total 


31.8% 


10.4% 


5.7% 


15.1% 


8.3% 


28.6% 


100.0% 






ISA 


Fel 


164 


121 


26 


65 








376 


104.3 


106.0 




% of Total 


43.6% 


32.2% 


6.9% 


17.3% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


111 


9 


9 


19 


1 


2 


151 


90.1 


52.0 




% of Total 


73.5% 


6.0% 


6.0% 


12.6% 


0.7% 


1.3% 


100.0% 






15B 


Fel 


166 


146 


38 


24 


6 


2 


382 


97.0 


94.0 




% of Total 


43.5% 


38.2% 


9.9% 


6.3% 


1.6% 


0.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


59 


3 


7 


6 


1 





76 


68.9 


45.5 




% of Total 


77.6% 


3.9%, 


9.2% 


7.9% 


1.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






16A 


Fel 


78 


40 


6 


25 


25 


3 


177 


169.9 


95.0 




% of Total 


44.1% 


22.6% 


3.4% 


14.1% 


14.1% 


1.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


57 


6 


8 


16 


19 


13 


119 


252.4 


101.0 




% of Total 


47.9% 


5.0% 


6.7% 


13.4% 


16.0% 


10.9% 


100.0% 






16B 


Fel 


480 


84 


171 


148 


63 


8 


954 


144.9 


88.0 




% of Total 


50.3% 


8.8% 


17.9% 


15.5% 


6.6% 


0.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


195 


35 


62 


83 


72 


4 


451 


182.6 


116.0 




% of Total 


43.2% 


7.8% 


13.7% 


18.4% 


16.0% 


0.9% 


100.0% 







This table is provided because prosecutorial districts (shown in the map in Part II) do not coincide with superior court districts. 



155 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) CASES PENDING 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS BY PROSECUTORIAL DISTRICT 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 



Prosecutoi 


-Lai 






Ages of Pending Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 


District 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


17A 


Fel 


470 


218 


104 


59 


19 


1 


871 


102.6 


78.0 




% of Total 


54.0% 


25.0% 


11.9% 


6.8% 


2.2% 


0.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


254 


60 


55 


35 


7 


1 


412 


92.3 


65.5 




% of Total 


61.7% 


14.6% 


13.3% 


8.5% 


1.7% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






17B 


Fel 


180 


18 


40 


15 


6 





259 


83.0 


49.0 




% of Total 


69.5% 


6.9% 


15.4% 


5.8% 


2.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


150 


23 


27 


13 


3 





216 


78.9 


56.0 




% of Total 


69.4% 


10.6% 


12.5% 


6.0% 


1.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






18 


Fel 


1,103 


98 


178 


198 


90 


43 


1,710 


129.8 


71.0 




% of Total 


64.5% 


5.7% 


10.4% 


11.6% 


5.3% 


2.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


88 


10 


19 


18 


4 


3 


142 


116.1 


55.5 




% of Total 


62.0% 


7.0% 


13.4% 


12.7% 


2.8% 


2.1% 


100.0% 






19A 


Fel 


319 


72 


114 


78 


21 


4 


608 


110.7 


82.5 




% of Total 


52.5% 


11.8% 


18.8% 


12.8% 


3.5% 


0.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


250 


44 


32 


41 


25 


6 


398 


119.9 


64.0 




% of Total 


62.8% 


11.1% 


8.0% 


10.3% 


6.3% 


1.5% 


100.0% 






19B 


Fel 


268 


63 


54 


141 


76 


8 


610 


171.7 


113.0 




% of Total 


43.9% 


10.3% 


8.9% 


23.1% 


12.5% 


1.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


139 


68 


51 


60 


26 


13 


357 


176.1 


100.0 




% of Total 


38.9% 


19.0% 


14.3% 


16.8% 


7.3% 


3.6% 


100.0% 






20 


Fel 


389 


26 


111 


86 


102 


20 


734 


180.0 


86.0 




% of Total 


53.0% 


3.5% 


15.1% 


11.7% 


13.9% 


2.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


348 


45 


73 


59 


47 


32 


604 


175.2 


68.0 




% of Total 


57.6% 


7.5% 


12.1% 


9.8% 


7.8% 


5.3% 


100.0% 






21 


Fel 


629 


109 


158 


126 


28 


2 


1,052 


98.2 


60.0 




% of Total 


59.8% 


10.4% 


15.0% 


12.0% 


2.7% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


378 


74 


97 


94 


44 


10 


697 


131.2 


79.0 




% of Total 


54.2% 


10.6% 


13.9% 


13.5% 


6.3% 


1.4% 


100.0% 






22 


Fel 


300 


68 


121 


57 


6 


2 


554 


92.0 


72.0 




% of Total 


54.2% 


12.3% 


21.8% 


10.3% 


1.1% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


288 


43 


37 


78 


11 





457 


100.9 


59.0 




% of Total 


63.0% 


9.4% 


8.1% 


17.1% 


2.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






23 


Fel 


164 


21 


35 


53 


22 


2 


297 


143.6 


70.0 




% of Total 


55.2% 


7.1% 


11.8% 


17.8% 


7.4% 


0.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


122 


27 


42 


66 


43 


9 


309 


193.7 


130.0 




% of Total 


39.5% 


8.7% 


13.6% 


21.4% 


13.9% 


2.9% 


100.0% 







This table is provided because prosecutorial districts (shown in the map in Part II) do not coincide with superior court districts. 



156 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) CASES PENDING 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS BY PROSECUTORIAL DISTRICT 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 



Prosecutorial 






Ages of Pending Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 


District 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


24 


Fel 


118 


20 


105 


33 


50 


12 


338 


208.0 


161.0 




% of Total 


34.9% 


5.9% 


31.1% 


9.8% 


14.8% 


3.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


60 


10 


32 


23 


10 


1 


136 


149.5 


105.0 




% of Total 


44.1% 


7.4% 


23.5% 


16.9% 


7.4% 


0.7% 


100.0% 






25 


Fel 


519 


101 


210 


219 


193 


36 


1,278 


204.7 


127.0 




% of Total 


40.6% 


7.9% 


16.4% 


17.1% 


15.1% 


2.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


486 


93 


168 


183 


101 


19 


1,050 


159.1 


99.0 




% of Total 


46.3% 


8.9% 


16.0% 


17.4% 


9.6% 


1.8% 


100.0% 






26 


Fel 


683 


58 


178 


86 


29 


17 


1,051 


111.2 


59.0 




% of Total 


65.0% 


5.5% 


16.9% 


8.2% 


2.8% 


1.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


366 


45 


70 


56 


25 


28 


590 


151.6 


65.0 




% of Total 


62.0% 


7.6% 


11.9% 


9.5% 


4.2% 


4.7% 


100.0% 






27A 


Fel 


190 


194 


81 


53 


56 


3 


577 


139.5 


93.0 




% of Total 


32.9% 


33.6% 


14.0% 


9.2% 


9.7% 


0.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


102 


59 


52 


79 


70 


14 


376 


229.5 


142.0 




% of Total 


27.1% 


15.7% 


13.8% 


21.0% 


18.6% 


3.7% 


100.0% 






27B 


Fel 


196 


186 


44 


106 


36 


5 


573 


154.1 


114.0 




% of Total 


34.2% 


32.5% 


7.7% 


18.5% 


6.3% 


0.9% 


100.0% 








Mis 


80 


16 


24 


60 


21 


2 


203 


173.4 


137.0 




% of Total 


39.4% 


7.9% 


11.8% 


29.6% 


10.3% 


1.0% 


100.0% 






28 


Fel 


228 


47 


57 


13 


4 


2 


351 


84.3 


64.0 




% of Total 


65.0% 


13.4% 


16.2% 


3.7% 


1.1% 


0.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


120 


2 


10 


4 








136 


38.6 


8.0 




% of Total 


88.2% 


1.5% 


7.4% 


2.9% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






29 


Fel 


235 


146 


245 


258 


151 


37 


1,072 


229.8 


150.0 




% of Total 


21.9% 


13.6% 


22.9% 


24.1% 


14.1% 


3.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


240 


85 


121 


112 


45 


11 


614 


160.6 


113.0 




% of Total 


39.1% 


13.8% 


19.7% 


18.2% 


7.3% 


1.8% 


100.0% 






30 


Fel 


424 


73 


76 


95 


67 


17 


752 


162.1 


81.0 




% of Total 


56.4% 


9.7% 


10.1% 


12.6% 


8.9% 


2.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


101 


23 


42 


33 


8 


15 


222 


201.4 


102.0 




% of Total 


45.5% 


10.4% 


18.9% 


14.9% 


3.6% 


6.8% 


100.0% 






State Totals Fel 


12,004 


2,981 


3,906 


3,284 


1,528 


365 


24,068 


140.2 


91.0 




% of Total 


49.9% 


12.4% 


16.2% 


13.6% 


6.3% 


1.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


6,516 


1,201 


1,567 


1,798 


835 


292 


12,209 


146.6 


79.0 




% of Total 


53.4% 


9.8% 


12.8% 


14.7% 


6.8% 


2.4% 


100.0% 







This table is provided because prosecutorial districts (shown in the map in Part II) do not coincide with superior court districts. 



157 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 

CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 - June 30, 1989 











Ages of Disposed Case 


s (Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 1 






















Camden 


Fel 


9 


3 


3 


10 


1 





26 


183.8 


133.0 




Mis 


29 


6 


15 


22 


2 


1 


75 


155.7 


158.0 


Chowan 


Fel 


07 


3 


22 


22 








114 


95.9 


71.0 




Mis 


141 


21 


14 


16 


3 





195 


72.3 


48.0 


Currituck 


Fel 


20 


4 


7 


7 


2 





40 


133.1 


87.5 




Mis 


77 


31 


32 


31 


3 





174 


123.8 


95.0 


Dare 


Fel 


162 


25 


86 


79 


29 





381 


149.8 


136.0 




Mis 


430 


54 


63 


81 


30 


1 


659 


94.2 


54.0 


Gates 


Fel 


21 


10 


7 


5 


1 





44 


112.5 


94.5 




Mis 


64 


4 


17 


13 





2 


100 


109.9 


68.0 


Pasquotank 


Fel 


126 


30 


52 


68 


5 





281 


118.4 


112.0 




Mis 


425 


51 


55 


42 


6 





579 


67.1 


48.0 


Perquimans 


Fel 


26 


5 


25 


25 


3 





84 


157.1 


138.5 




Mis 


76 


10 


17 


21 


7 


2 


133 


123.2 


82.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


431 


80 


202 


216 


41 





970 


133.5 


112.0 






44.4% 


8.2% 


20.8% 


22.3% 


4.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,242 


177 


213 


226 


51 


6 


1,915 


91.7 


56.0 






64.9% 


9.2% 


11.1% 


11.8% 


2.7% 


0.3% 


100.0% 






District 2 

Beaufort 


Fel 


307 


49 


34 


35 


7 


5 


437 


95.8 


48.0 




Mis 


331 


43 


43 


21 








438 


68.1 


58.5 


Hyde 


Fel 


24 


16 


2 


8 


4 





54 


135.3 


96.0 




Mis 


24 


4 


1 


2 








31 


66.1 


51.0 


Martin 


Fel 


73 


15 


31 


10 


23 





152 


146.7 


99.5 




Mis 


45 


7 


10 


18 


2 





82 


118.8 


73.0 


Tyrrell 


Fel 


6 


11 


4 


5 


2 





28 


145.6 


107.5 




Mis 


22 


6 


3 


4 








35 


86.7 


62.0 


Washington 


Fel 


50 


12 


24 


21 


7 





114 


136.1 


103.5 




Mis 


44 


10 


11 


8 








73 


86.3 


69.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


460 


103 


95 


79 


43 


5 


785 


116.0 


77.0 






58.6% 


13.1% 


12.1% 


10.1% 


5.5% 


0.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


466 


70 


68 


53 


2 





659 


77.3 


62.0 






70.7% 


10.6% 


10.3% 


8.0% 


0.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 3A 






















Pitt 


Fel 


918 


521 


265 


337 


43 


6 


2,090 


116.1 


104.0 






43.9% 


24.9% 


12.7% 


16.1% 


2.1% 


0.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,032 


172 


253 


193 


27 





1,677 


94.4 


72.0 






61.5% 


10.3% 


15.1% 


11.5% 


1.6% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







158 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 











Ages of Disposed Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 3B 






















Carteret 


Fel 


214 


42 


33 


56 


9 





354 


105.4 


63.0 




Mis 


144 


22 


15 


13 


2 





196 


64.9 


42.0 


Craven 


Fel 


479 


76 


106 


71 


4 





736 


82.8 


59.0 




Mis 


566 


49 


47 


42 








704 


54.9 


34.0 


Pamlico 


Fel 


13 


17 


12 


5 


1 


1 


49 


130.0 


119.0 




Mis 


12 


4 


7 


3 


1 





27 


111.1 


94.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


706 


135 


151 


132 


14 


1 


1,139 


91.8 


63.0 






62.0% 


11.9% 


13.3% 


11.6% 


1.2% 


0.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


722 


75 


69 


58 


3 





927 


58.6 


39.0 






77.9% 


8.1% 


7.4% 


6.3% 


0.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 4A 






















Duplin 


Fel 


365 


17 


49 


14 








445 


54.6 


34.0 




Mis 


73 


3 


10 











86 


45.8 


24.0 


Jones 


Fel 


35 


11 


10 











56 


57.8 


46.0 




Mis 


7 








1 








8 


58.5 


37.5 


Sampson 


Fel 


397 


53 


11 


3 








464 


39.7 


20.0 




Mis 


87 


6 


9 











102 


43.3 


27.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


797 


81 


70 


17 








965 


47.6 


32.0 






82.6% 


8.4% 


7.3% 


1.8% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


167 


9 


19 


1 








196 


45.0 


27.0 






85.2% 


4.6% 


9.7% 


0.5% 


0.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 4B 






















Onslow 


Fel 


1,097 


189 


172 


57 


4 





1,519 


69.7 


50.0 






72.2% 


12.4% 


11.3% 


3.8% 


0.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


311 


43 


37 


10 


3 





404 


62.1 


42.0 






77.0% 


10.6% 


9.2% 


2.5% 


0.7% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 5 






















New Hanover 


Fel 


1,220 


272 


286 


206 


46 





2,030 


96.8 


71.5 




Mis 


833 


76 


129 


122 


26 





1,186 


84.6 


56.0 


Pender 


Fel 


262 


11 


12 


19 


2 





306 


76.8 


67.0 




Mis 


89 


12 


7 


12 


4 





124 


87.2 


54.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


1,482 


283 


298 


225 


48 





2,336 


94.2 


69.0 






63.4% 


12.1% 


12.8% 


9.6% 


2.1% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


922 


88 


136 


134 


30 





1,310 


84.9 


56.0 






70.4% 


6.7% 


10.4% 


10.2% 


2.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 6A 






















Halifax 


Fel 


273 


28 


47 


38 


13 


1 


400 


86.3 


44.5 






68.3% 


7.0% 


11.8% 


9.5% 


3.3% 


0.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


118 


21 


23 


35 


21 





218 


136.0 


67.0 






54.1% 


9.6% 


10.6% 


16.1% 


9.6% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







159 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 











Ages of Dis 


posed Case! 


. (Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 6B 






















Bertie 


Fel 


62 


10 


17 


16 


4 





109 


108.0 


75.0 




Mis 


20 


4 


14 





2 





58 


128.6 


94.0 


Hertford 


Fel 


07 


6 


10 


10 


4 


1 


146 


97.3 


48.0 




Mis 


80 


11 


17 


22 





1 


140 


105.2 


72.0 


Northampton 


Fel 


75 


13 


50 


34 








172 


117.7 


109.0 




Mis 


32 


12 


19 


20 


1 





84 


134.6 


114.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


234 


29 


86 


69 


8 


1 


427 


108.3 


75.0 






54.8% 


6.8% 


20.1% 


16.2% 


1.9% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


150 


27 


50 


51 


3 


1 


282 


118.8 


81.0 






53.2% 


9.6% 


17.7% 


18.1% 


1.1% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






District 7A 






















Nash 


Fel 


657 


63 


65 


43 


2 


1 


831 


68.8 


56.0 






79.1% 


7.6% 


7.8% 


5.2% 


0.2% 


0.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


315 


29 


41 


24 


7 


1 


417 


74.4 


53.0 






75.5% 


7.0% 


9.8% 


5.8% 


1.7% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 7B-C 






















Edgecombe 


Fel 


470 


44 


64 


42 


18 





638 


84.4 


57.0 




Mis 


190 


19 


49 


27 


14 





299 


100.6 


65.0 


Wilson 


Fel 


614 


51 


73 


67 


14 





819 


86.5 


70.0 




Mis 


239 


29 


22 


20 


9 


1 


320 


81.2 


52.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


1,084 


95 


137 


109 


32 





1,457 


85.6 


68.0 






74.4% 


6.5% 


9.4% 


7.5% 


2.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


429 


48 


71 


47 


23 


1 


619 


90.6 


55.0 






69.3% 


7.8% 


11.5% 


7.6% 


3.7% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 8A 






















Greene 


Fel 


52 


20 


7 


9 


3 





91 


97.6 


78.0 




Mis 


24 


5 


5 


5 








39 


92.9 


80.0 


Lenoir 


Fel 


313 


32 


53 


62 


16 


1 


477 


93.8 


54.0 




Mis 


300 


38 


39 


33 


1 





411 


70.1 


45.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


365 


52 


60 


71 


19 


1 


568 


94.4 


59.0 






64.3% 


9.2% 


10.6% 


12.5% 


3.3% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


324 


43 


44 


38 


1 





450 


72.1 


49.0 






72.0% 


9.6% 


9.8% 


8.4% 


0.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






DLstrict 8B 






















Wayne 


Fel 


281 


68 


% 


82 


15 


3 


545 


119.2 


87.0 






51.6% 


12.5% 


17.6% 


15.0% 


2.8% 


0.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


356 


89 


129 


109 


25 


1 


709 


114.4 


88.0 






50.2% 


12.6% 


18.2% 


15.4% 


3.5% 


0.1% 


100.0% 







160 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 











Ages of Dis 


posed Case; 


» (Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 9 






















Franklin 


Fel 


136 


39 


65 


76 


11 


5 


332 


144.0 


112.0 




Mis 


131 


30 


29 


42 


22 


16 


270 


203.4 


93.0 


Granville 


Fel 


250 


47 


36 


23 


6 


1 


363 


80.5 


63.0 




Mis 


134 


26 


10 


11 


4 





185 


80.9 


63.0 


Person 


Fel 


92 


33 


65 


64 


16 


6 


276 


183.6 


134.5 




Mis 


84 


17 


53 


46 


4 


5 


209 


152.3 


132.0 


Vance 


Fel 


330 


51 


55 


62 


17 


4 


519 


106.7 


77.0 




Mis 


217 


49 


49 


50 


10 


2 


377 


114.9 


77.0 


Warren 


Fel 


43 


4 


31 


10 


2 





90 


121.1 


107.0 




Mis 


38 


23 


23 


17 








101 


119.9 


101.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


851 


174 


252 


235 


52 


16 


1,580 


122.7 


83.0 






53.9% 


11.0% 


15.9% 


14.9% 


3.3% 


1.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


604 


145 


164 


166 


40 


23 


1,142 


137.6 


84.5 






52.9% 


12.7% 


14.4% 


14.5% 


3.5% 


2.0% 


100.0% 






District 10A-D 






















Wake 


Fel 


1,966 


429 


549 


601 


194 


6 


3,745 


124.7 


84.0 






52.5% 


11.5% 


14.7% 


16.0% 


5.2% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,489 


216 


198 


204 


64 


5 


2,176 


98.3 


62.0 






68.4% 


9.9% 


9.1% 


9.4% 


2.9% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 11 






















Harnett 


Fel 


408 


35 


23 


12 








478 


55.6 


44.0 




Mis 


156 


8 


19 


2 








185 


43.0 


19.0 


Johnston 


Fel 


291 


33 


45 


16 








385 


70.7 


60.0 




Mis 


351 


33 


42 


15 


2 





443 


61.9 


50.0 


Lee 


Fel 


305 


63 


46 


20 


2 





436 


72.8 


66.5 




Mis 


121 


20 


32 


5 


3 





181 


84.8 


76.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


1,004 


131 


114 


48 


2 





1,299 


65.8 


56.0 






77.3% 


10.1% 


8.8% 


3.7% 


0.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


628 


61 


93 


22 


5 





809 


62.7 


50.0 






77.6% 


7.5% 


11.5% 


2.7% 


0.6% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 12A-C 






















Cumberland 


Fel 


1,009 


242 


323 


338 


68 


3 


1,983 


117.4 


89.0 






50.9% 


12.2% 


16.3% 


17.0% 


3.4% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


227 


65 


86 


35 


6 





419 


95.4 


76.0 






54.2% 


15.5% 


20.5% 


8.4% 


1.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 







161 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 











Ages of Dis 


posed Cases 


i (Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 13 






















Bladen 


Fel 


60 


19 


106 


198 


4 





387 


182.9 


205.0 




Mis 


79 


28 


16 


7 


7 





137 


96.2 


76.0 


Brunswick 


Fel 


177 


114 


176 


330 


91 


14 


902 


205.3 


175.0 




Mis 


87 


12 


17 


31 


8 





155 


124.2 


78.0 


Columbus 


Fel 


72 


13 


23 


97 


35 


7 


247 


263.1 


202.0 




Mis 


115 


29 


33 


67 


16 


5 


265 


178.1 


109.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


309 


146 


305 


625 


130 


21 


1,536 


209.0 


186.0 






20.1% 


9.5% 


19.9% 


40.7% 


8.5% 


1.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


281 


69 


66 


105 


31 


5 


557 


143.0 


90.0 






50.4% 


12.4% 


11.8% 


18.9% 


5.6% 


0.9% 


100.0% 






District 14A-B 






















Durham 


Fel 


915 


178 


210 


254 


51 


9 


1,617 


112.9 


76.0 






56.6% 


11.0% 


13.0% 


15.7% 


3.2% 


0.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


208 


30 


40 


65 


18 


6 


367 


130.4 


69.0 






56.7% 


8.2% 


10.9% 


17.7% 


4.9% 


1.6% 


100.0% 






District ISA 






















Alamance 


Fel 


992 


183 


79 


68 


2 





1,324 


69.5 


63.0 






74.9% 


13.8% 


6.0% 


5.1% 


0.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


514 


87 


45 


23 


7 





676 


67.4 


52.0 






76.0% 


12.9% 


6.7% 


3.4% 


1.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 15B 






















Chatham 


Fel 


131 


36 


37 


72 


2 





278 


130.4 


95.0 




Mis 


59 


11 


14 


15 


1 





100 


103.4 


74.5 


Orange 


Fel 


322 


104 


95 


118 


9 





648 


106.6 


91.5 




Mis 


95 


21 


7 


14 








137 


79.2 


66.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


453 


140 


132 


190 


11 





926 


113.7 


93.0 






48.9% 


15.1% 


14.3% 


20.5% 


1.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


154 


32 


21 


29 


1 





237 


89.4 


69.0 






65.0% 


13.5% 


8.9% 


12.2% 


0.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 16A 






















Hoke 


Fel 


72 


13 


5 


35 


6 





131 


120.4 


72.0 




Mis 


28 


11 


10 


8 








57 


94.2 


97.0 


Scotland 


Fel 


172 


26 


100 


219 


56 


2 


575 


188.8 


175.0 




Mis 


103 


71 


55 


138 


21 


53 


441 


293.6 


168.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


244 


39 


105 


254 


62 


2 


706 


176.1 


156.0 






34.6% 


5.5% 


14.9% 


36.0% 


8.8% 


0.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


131 


82 


65 


146 


21 


53 


498 


270.8 


166.0 






26.3% 


16.5% 


13.1% 


29.3% 


4.2% 


10.6% 


100.0% 






District 16B 






















Robeson 


Fel 


731 


435 


403 


218 


66 





1,853 


121.2 


105.0 






39.4% 


23.5% 


21.7% 


1 1 .8% 


3.6% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


395 


106 


128 


115 


18 


2 


764 


110.7 


85.5 






51.7% 


13.9% 


16.8% 


15.1% 


2.4% 


0.3% 


100.0% 







162 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 











Ages of Disposed Cases (Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 17A 






















Caswell 


Fel 


133 


26 


19 


19 


1 





198 


79.7 


59.5 




Mis 


157 


21 


27 


18 


2 





225 


80.6 


64.0 


Rockingham 


Fel 


386 


80 


93 


184 


22 





765 


123.1 


88.0 




Mis 


415 


97 


140 


97 


17 


2 


768 


100.6 


79.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


519 


106 


112 


203 


23 





963 


114.2 


83.0 






53.9% 


11.0% 


11.6% 


21.1% 


2.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


572 


118 


167 


115 


19 


2 


993 


96.0 


73.0 






57.6% 


11.9% 


16.8% 


11.6% 


1.9% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 17B 






















Stokes 


Fel 


183 


24 


26 


56 


1 





290 


109.1 


65.0 




Mis 


97 


17 


12 


5 


2 





133 


72.4 


64.0 


Surry 


Fel 


426 


260 


77 


49 


3 


4 


819 


110.6 


89.0 




Mis 


366 


97 


52 


16 


1 





532 


73.6 


68.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


609 


284 


103 


105 


4 


4 


1,109 


110.2 


86.0 






54.9% 


25.6% 


9.3% 


9.5% 


0.4% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


463 


114 


64 


21 


3 





665 


73.4 


67.0 






69.6% 


17.1% 


9.6% 


3.2% 


0.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 18A-E 






















Guilford 


Fel 


2,146 


417 


540 


573 


199 


31 


3,906 


125.4 


82.0 






54.9% 


10.7% 


13.8% 


14.7% 


5.1% 


0.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


301 


53 


78 


60 


4 


2 


498 


95.7 


70.5 






60.4% 


10.6% 


15.7% 


12.0% 


0.8% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






District 19A 






















Cabarrus 


Fel 


400 


119 


162 


140 


18 


1 


840 


119.2 


94.0 






47.6% 


14.2% 


19.3% 


16.7% 


2.1% 


0.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


322 


127 


84 


117 


22 


2 


674 


126.6 


95.0 






47.8% 


18.8% 


12.5% 


17.4% 


3.3% 


0.3% 


100.0% 






District 19B 






















Montgomery 


Fel 


23 


13 


19 


36 


17 


2 


110 


223.9 


181.0 




Mis 


94 


49 


57 


58 


31 


19 


308 


209.5 


125.5 


Randolph 


Fel 


237 


60 


115 


183 


82 


4 


681 


186.7 


142.0 




Mis 


472 


80 


124 


166 


62 


14 


918 


147.8 


87.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


260 


73 


134 


219 


99 


6 


791 


191.9 


148.0 






32.9% 


9.2% 


16.9% 


27.7% 


12.5% 


0.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


566 


129 


181 


224 


93 


33 


1,226 


163.3 


103.0 






46.2% 


10.5% 


14.8% 


18.3% 


7.6% 


2.7% 


100.0% 






District 19C 






















Rowan 


Fel 


627 


67 


56 


28 


33 


2 


813 


90.0 


53.0 






77.1% 


8.2% 


6.9% 


3.4% 


4.1% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


297 


31 


38 


28 


11 


1 


406 


80.4 


54.0 






73.2% 


7.6% 


9.4% 


6.9% 


2.7% 


0.2% 


100.0% 







163 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 











Ages of Disposed Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 

Age 


Median 




0-00 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 20A 






















Anson 


Pel 


110 


27 


38 


49 


4 





228 


117.3 


94.0 




Mis 


240 


38 


57 


38 


10 





383 


96.2 


74.0 


Moore 


Fel 


502 


58 


62 


100 


13 





735 


84.6 


48.0 




Mis 


306 


53 


66 


42 


7 


1 


475 


86.3 


62.0 


Richmond 


Fel 


443 


42 


32 


24 


5 


1 


547 


59.1 


39.0 




Mis 


420 


25 


30 


33 


5 





513 


63.1 


38.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


1,055 


127 


132 


173 


22 


1 


1,510 


80.3 


46.0 






69.9% 


8.4% 


8.7% 


11.5% 


1.5% 


0.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


966 


116 


153 


113 


22 


1 


1,371 


80.4 


51.0 






70.5% 


8.5% 


11.2% 


8.2% 


1.6% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 20B 






















Stanly 


Fel 


183 


36 


49 


57 


19 


2 


346 


123.3 


77.0 




Mis 


168 


44 


72 


48 


5 





337 


109.0 


91.0 


Union 


Fel 


456 


78 


91 


76 


2 


9 


712 


101.4 


61.0 




Mis 


365 


32 


63 


42 


1 


27 


530 


125.2 


59.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


639 


114 


140 


133 


21 


11 


1,058 


108.6 


62.0 






60.4% 


10.8% 


13.2% 


12.6% 


2.0% 


1.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


533 


76 


135 


90 


6 


27 


867 


118.9 


70.0 






61.5% 


8.8% 


15.6% 


10.4% 


0.7% 


3.1% 


100.0% 






District 21A-D 






















Forsyth 


Fel 


1,154 


472 


548 


406 


71 


41 


2,692 


134.8 


103.0 






42.9% 


17.5% 


20.4% 


15.1% 


2.6% 


1.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,223 


380 


323 


206 


70 


2 


2,204 


107.0 


82.0 






55.5% 


17.2% 


14.7% 


9.3% 


3.2% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 22 






















Alexander 


Fel 


40 


3 


10 


15 


4 





72 


125.6 


49.0 




Mis 


136 


30 


17 


27 


2 





212 


93.5 


49.5 


Davidson 


Fel 


187 


51 


79 


57 


13 


7 


394 


142.4 


94.0 




Mis 


344 


60 


66 


58 


3 


1 


532 


87.5 


58.5 


Davie 


Fel 


25 


2 


10 


52 


5 





94 


184.0 


205.5 




Mis 


89 


14 


34 


42 


8 





187 


137.6 


111.0 


Iredell 


Fel 


172 


63 


68 


101 


7 





411 


126.6 


111.0 




Mis 


674 


100 


94 


86 


8 


1 


963 


80.4 


56.0 


District Totals 


Pel 


424 


119 


167 


225 


29 


7 


971 


138.5 


108.0 






43.7% 


12.3% 


17.2% 


23.2% 


3.0% 


0.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,243 


204 


211 


213 


21 


2 


1,894 


89.5 


59.0 






65.6% 


10.8% 


11.1% 


11.2% 


1.1% 


0.1% 


100.0% 







164 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 











Ages of DIs 


p>osed Case; 


> (Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 23 






















Alleghany 


Fel 


13 


2 


2 


10 


5 


1 


33 


196.7 


145.0 




Mis 


11 





6 


9 


1 


2 


29 


206.2 


133.0 


Ashe 


Fel 


35 


2 


9 


15 


14 


2 


77 


211.5 


169.0 




Mis 


25 


15 


8 


13 


18 


3 


82 


241.8 


144.0 


Wilkes 


Fel 


220 


43 


92 


65 


6 





426 


113.8 


89.0 




Mis 


254 


34 


38 


66 


15 





407 


105.5 


67.0 


Yadkin 


Fel 


109 


60 


29 


31 


4 





233 


106.0 


93.0 




Mis 


74 


11 


28 


36 


1 





150 


119.3 


96.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


377 


107 


132 


121 


29 


3 


769 


124.8 


91.0 






49.0% 


13.9% 


17.2% 


15.7% 


3.8% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


364 


60 


80 


124 


35 


5 


668 


129.7 


77.5 






54.5% 


9.0% 


12.0% 


18.6% 


5.2% 


0.7% 


100.0% 






District 24 






















Avery 


Fel 


16 


3 


19 


35 


9 


3 


85 


230.5 


205.0 




Mis 


7 





4 


4 


3 





18 


184.3 


146.0 


Madison 


Fel 


23 


6 


8 


19 


27 


1 


84 


300.4 


230.5 




Mis 


4 


2 


5 


8 


14 





33 


299.9 


274.0 


Mitchell 


Fel 


4 


1 


2 


% 


21 





124 


247.7 


210.0 




Mis 


11 





6 


24 








41 


217.9 


224.0 


Watauga 


Fel 


54 


34 


123 


40 


121 


4 


376 


267.6 


162.0 




Mis 


43 


10 


18 


14 


10 


4 


99 


185.3 


108.0 


Yancey 


Fel 


6 





15 


23 


19 





63 


270.6 


232.0 




Mis 


2 





12 


16 


2 


1 


33 


233.8 


198.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


103 


44 


167 


213 


197 


8 


732 


263.9 


210.0 






14.1% 


6.0% 


22.8% 


29.1% 


26.9% 


1.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


67 


12 


45 


66 


29 


5 


224 


215.2 


161.0 






29.9% 


5.4% 


20.1% 


29.5% 


12.9% 


2.2% 


100.0% 






District 2SA 






















Burke 


Fel 


119 


44 


103 


261 


58 


21 


606 


237.0 


189.5 




Mis 


230 


81 


173 


175 


30 


19 


708 


184.5 


136.5 


Caldwell 


Fel 


182 


92 


148 


146 


16 


5 


589 


153.9 


132.0 




Mis 


229 


100 


141 


85 


12 





567 


124.4 


106.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


301 


136 


251 


407 


74 


26 


1,195 


196.0 


161.0 






25.2% 


11.4% 


21.0% 


34.1% 


6.2% 


2.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


459 


181 


314 


260 


42 


19 


1,275 


157.7 


119.0 






36.0% 


14.2% 


24.6% 


20.4% 


3.3% 


1.5% 


100.0% 






District 25B 






















Catawba 


Fel 


222 


120 


222 


241 


109 


26 


940 


211.4 


152.5 






23.6% 


12.8% 


23.6% 


25.6% 


11.6% 


2.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


323 


119 


111 


113 


48 


21 


735 


158.9 


98.0 






43.9% 


16.2% 


15.1% 


15.4% 


6.5% 


2.9% 


100.0% 







165 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 - June 30, 1989 











Ages of Disposed Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 26A-C 






















Mecklenburg 


Fcl 


1,756 


389 


533 


470 


110 


23 


3,281 


119.6 


83.0 






53.5% 


11.9% 


16.2% 


14.3% 


3.4% 


0.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,086 


228 


198 


188 


63 


24 


1,787 


114.8 


75.0 






60.8% 


12.8% 


11.1% 


10.5% 


3.5% 


1.3% 


100.0% 






District 27A 






















Gaston 


Fel 


802 


339 


237 


200 


32 





1,610 


101.6 


91.0 






49.8% 


21.1% 


14.7% 


12.4% 


2.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


396 


75 


169 


211 


51 


5 


907 


142.6 


105.0 






43.7% 


8.3% 


18.6% 


23.3% 


5.6% 


0.6% 


100.0% 






District 27B 






















Cleveland 


Fel 


188 


100 


75 


72 


19 





454 


121.4 


103.5 




Mis 


128 


27 


59 


46 


1 


1 


262 


108.7 


94.0 


Lincoln 


Fel 


198 


37 


35 


42 


19 


6 


337 


131.0 


71.0 




Mis 


175 


34 


26 


27 


11 


3 


276 


105.4 


64.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


386 


137 


110 


114 


38 


6 


791 


125.5 


95.0 






48.8% 


17.3% 


13.9% 


14.4% 


4.8% 


0.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


303 


61 


85 


73 


12 


4 


538 


107.0 


70.5 






56.3% 


11.3% 


15.8% 


13.6% 


2.2% 


0.7% 


100.0% 






District 28 






















Buncombe 


Fel 


558 


238 


246 


121 


10 


2 


1,175 


108.5 


96.0 






47.5% 


20.3% 


20.9% 


10.3% 


0.9% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


254 


43 


52 


48 


1 





398 


84.4 


74.0 






63.8% 


10.8% 


13.1% 


12.1% 


0.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 29 






















Henderson 


Fel 


146 


25 


111 


83 


7 


2 


374 


141.1 


132.0 




Mis 


114 


21 


20 


29 


3 





187 


97.5 


69.0 


McDowell 


Fel 


76 


11 


33 


50 


10 





180 


140.9 


126.0 




Mis 


66 


19 


9 


17 


5 





116 


107.3 


76.0 


Polk 


Fel 


12 


5 


4 


44 


12 


8 


85 


294.6 


197.0 




Mis 


10 


5 


12 


14 


5 





46 


199.5 


161.5 


Rutherford 


Fel 


172 


48 


71 


194 


27 


3 


515 


161.7 


158.0 




Mis 


221 


60 


79 


79 


9 





448 


117.1 


92.0 


Transylvania 


Fel 


52 


54 


65 


94 


31 





296 


187.7 


141.0 




Mis 


27 


5 


10 


16 


2 


1 


61 


147.9 


112.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


458 


143 


284 


465 


87 


13 


1,450 


166.9 


142.0 






31.6% 


9.9% 


19.6% 


32.1% 


6.0% 


0.9% 


100.0% 








Mis 


438 


110 


130 


155 


24 


1 


858 


118.1 


90.0 






51.0% 


12.8% 


15.2% 


18.1% 


2.8% 


0.1% 


100.0% 







166 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) 
CASES DISPOSED IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 - June 30, 1989 











Ages of Disposed Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 30A 






















Cherokee 


Fel 


83 


9 


32 


19 


31 


5 


179 


178.8 


113.0 




Mis 


19 


7 


15 


10 








51 


116.5 


113.0 


Clay 


Fel 


13 








17 








30 


144.7 


182.0 




Mis 


15 


3 


1 


4 








23 


84.9 


63.0 


Graham 


Fel 


33 


4 





38 


2 





77 


145.2 


187.0 




Mis 


20 


10 





12 


4 


3 


49 


218.9 


101.0 


Macon 


Fel 


40 


28 


30 


26 


7 


8 


139 


210.6 


131.0 




Mis 


39 


9 


11 


3 





3 


65 


154.9 


75.0 


Swain 


Fel 


16 


8 


29 


15 


2 





70 


145.7 


149.0 




Mis 


11 


4 


4 


6 


2 





27 


154.8 


103.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


185 


49 


91 


115 


42 


13 


495 


175.8 


128.0 






37.4% 


9.9% 


18.4% 


23.2% 


8.5% 


2.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


104 


33 


31 


35 


6 


6 


215 


152.9 


91.0 






48.4% 


15.3% 


14.4% 


16.3% 


2.8% 


2.8% 


100.0% 






District 30B 






















Haywood 


Fel 


279 


61 


54 


48 


13 


9 


464 


135.8 


67.5 




Mis 


161 


30 


35 


17 


1 





244 


81.0 


64.0 


Jackson 


Fel 


135 


53 


35 


68 


6 





297 


125.4 


98.0 




Mis 


48 


6 


4 


39 








97 


120.8 


103.0 


District Totals 


Fel 


414 


114 


89 


116 


19 


9 


761 


131.7 


78.0 






54.4% 


15.0% 


11.7% 


15.2% 


2.5% 


1.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


209 


36 


39 


56 


1 





341 


92.3 


69.0 






61.3% 


10.6% 


11.4% 


16.4% 


0.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






State Totals 


Fel 


30,654 


7,538 


8,672 


9,094 


2,186 


309 


58,453 


120.9 


85.0 






52.4% 


12.9% 


14.8% 


15.6% 


3.7% 


0.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


21,674 


4,090 


4,747 


4,405 


990 


266 


36,172 


107.7 


72.0 






59.9% 


11.3% 


13.1% 


12.2% 


2.7% 


0.7% 


100.0% 







167 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) CASES DISPOSED 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS BY PROSECUTORIAL DISTRICT 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 



osecutoi 


lal 






Ages of Dis 


posed Cases 


i (Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 


District 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


1 


Fel 


431 


80 


202 


216 


41 





970 


133.5 


112.0 




% of Total 


44.4% 


8.2% 


20.8% 


22.3% 


4.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,242 


177 


213 


226 


51 


6 


1,915 


91.7 


56.0 




% of Total 


64.9% 


9.2% 


11.1% 


11.8% 


2.7% 


0.3% 


100.0% 






2 


Fel 


460 


103 


95 


79 


43 


5 


785 


116.0 


77.0 




% of Total 


58.6% 


13.1% 


12.1% 


10.1% 


5.5% 


0.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


466 


70 


68 


53 


2 





659 


77.3 


62.0 




% of Total 


70.7% 


10.6% 


10.3% 


8.0% 


0.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






3 A 


Fel 


918 


521 


265 


337 


43 


6 


2,090 


116.1 


104.0 




% of Total 


43.9% 


24.9% 


12.7% 


16.1% 


2.1% 


0.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,032 


172 


253 


193 


27 





1,677 


94.4 


72.0 




% of Total 


61.5% 


10.3% 


15.1% 


11.5% 


1.6% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






3B 


Fel 


706 


135 


151 


132 


14 


1 


1,139 


91.8 


63.0 




% of Total 


62.0% 


11.9% 


13.3% 


11.6% 


1.2% 


0.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


722 


75 


69 


58 


3 





927 


58.6 


39.0 




% of Total 


77.9% 


8.1% 


7.4% 


6.3% 


0.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






4 


Fel 


1,894 


270 


242 


74 


4 





2,484 


61.1 


43.0 




% of Total 


76.2% 


10.9% 


9.7% 


3.0% 


0.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


478 


52 


56 


11 


3 





600 


56.5 


36.0 




% of Total 


79.7% 


8.7% 


9.3% 


1.8% 


0.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






5 


Fel 


1,482 


283 


298 


225 


48 





2,336 


94.2 


69.0 




% of Total 


63.4% 


12.1% 


12.8% 


9.6% 


2.1% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


922 


88 


136 


134 


30 





1,310 


84.9 


56.0 




% of Total 


70.4% 


6.7% 


10.4% 


10.2% 


2.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






6 


Fel 


507 


57 


133 


107 


21 


2 


827 


97.7 


61.0 




% of Total 


61.3% 


6.9% 


16.1% 


12.9% 


2.5% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


268 


48 


73 


86 


24 


1 


500 


126.3 


78.5 




% of Total 


53.6% 


9.6% 


14.6% 


17.2% 


4.8% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






7 


Fel 


1,741 


158 


202 


152 


34 


1 


2,288 


79.5 


64.0 




% of Total 


76.1% 


6.9% 


8.8% 


6.6% 


1.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


744 


77 


112 


71 


30 


2 


1,036 


84.1 


54.0 




% of Total 


71.8% 


7.4% 


10.8% 


6.9% 


2.9% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






8 


Fel 


646 


120 


156 


153 


34 


4 


1,113 


106.5 


76.0 




% of Total 


58.0% 


10.8% 


14.0% 


13.7% 


3.1% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


680 


132 


173 


147 


26 


1 


1,159 


97.9 


69.0 




% of Total 


58.7% 


11.4% 


14.9% 


12.7% 


2.2% 


0.1% 


100.0% 







This table is provided because prosecutorial districts (shown in the map in Part II) do not coincide with superior court districts. 



168 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) CASES DISPOSED 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS BY PROSECUTORIAL DISTRICT 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 



Prosecutorial 






Ages of Disposed Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 


District 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


9 


Fel 


851 


174 


252 


235 


52 


16 


1,580 


122.7 


83.0 




% of Total 


53.9% 


11.0% 


15.9% 


14.9% 


3.3% 


1.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


604 


145 


164 


166 


40 


23 


1,142 


137.6 


84.5 




% of Total 


52.9% 


12.7% 


14.4% 


14.5% 


3.5% 


2.0% 


100.0% 






10 


Fel 


1,966 


429 


549 


601 


194 


6 


3,745 


124.7 


84.0 




% of Total 


52.5% 


11.5% 


14.7% 


16.0% 


5.2% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,489 


216 


198 


204 


64 


5 


2,176 


98.3 


62.0 




% of Total 


68.4% 


9.9% 


9.1% 


9.4% 


2.9% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






11 


Fel 


1,004 


131 


114 


48 


2 





1,299 


65.8 


56.0 




% of Total 


77.3% 


10.1% 


8.8% 


3.7% 


0.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


628 


61 


93 


22 


5 





809 


62.7 


50.0 




% of Total 


77.6% 


7.5% 


11.5% 


2.7% 


0.6% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






12 


Fel 


1,009 


242 


323 


338 


68 


3 


1,983 


117.4 


89.0 




% of Total 


50.9% 


12.2% 


16.3% 


17.0% 


3.4% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


227 


65 


86 


35 


6 





419 


95.4 


76.0 




% of Total 


54.2% 


15.5% 


20.5% 


8.4% 


1.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






13 


Fel 


309 


146 


305 


625 


130 


21 


1,536 


209.0 


186.0 




% of Total 


20.1% 


9.5% 


19.9% 


40.7% 


8.5% 


1.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


281 


69 


66 


105 


31 


5 


557 


143.0 


90.0 




% of Total 


50.4% 


12.4% 


11.8% 


18.9% 


5.6% 


0.9% 


100.0% 






14 


Fel 


915 


178 


210 


254 


51 


9 


1,617 


112.9 


76.0 




% of Total 


56.6% 


11.0% 


13.0% 


15.7% 


3.2% 


0.6% 


100.0% 








Mis 


208 


30 


40 


65 


18 


6 


367 


130.4 


69.0 




% of Total 


56.7% 


8.2% 


10.9% 


17.7% 


4.9% 


1.6% 


100.0% 






ISA 


Fel 


992 


183 


79 


68 


2 





1,324 


69.5 


63.0 




% of Total 


74.9% 


13.8% 


6.0% 


5.1% 


0.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


514 


87 


45 


23 


7 





676 


67.4 


52.0 




% of Total 


76.0% 


12.9% 


6.7% 


3.4% 


1.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






15B 


Fel 


453 


140 


132 


190 


11 





926 


113.7 


93.0 




% of Total 


48.9% 


15.1% 


14.3% 


20.5% 


1.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


154 


32 


21 


29 


1 





237 


89.4 


69.0 




% of Total 


65.0% 


13.5% 


8.9% 


12.2% 


0.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






16A 


Fel 


244 


39 


105 


254 


62 


2 


706 


176.1 


156.0 




% of Total 


34.6% 


5.5% 


14.9% 


36.0% 


8.8% 


0.3% 


100.0% 








Mis 


131 


82 


65 


146 


21 


53 


498 


270.8 


166.0 




% of Total 


26.3% 


16.5% 


13.1% 


29.3% 


4.2% 


10.6% 


100.0% 






16B 


Fel 


731 


435 


403 


218 


66 





1,853 


121.2 


105.0 




% of Total 


39.4% 


23.5% 


21.7% 


11.8% 


3.6% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


395 


106 


128 


115 


18 


2 


764 


110.7 


85.5 




% of Total 


51.7% 


13.9% 


16.8% 


15.1% 


2.4% 


0.3% 


100.0% 







This table is provided because prosecutorial districts (shown in the map in Part II) do not coincide with superior court districts. 



169 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) CASES DISPOSED 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS BY PROSECUTORIAL DISTRICT 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 - June 30, 1989 



Prosecutorial 






Ages of Disposed Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 


District 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


17A 


Fel 


519 


106 


112 


203 


23 





963 


114.2 


83.0 




% of Total 


53.9% 


11.0% 


11.6% 


21.1% 


2.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


572 


118 


167 


115 


19 


2 


993 


96.0 


73.0 




% of Total 


57.6% 


11.9% 


16.8% 


11.6% 


1.9% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






17B 


Fel 


609 


284 


103 


105 


4 


4 


1,109 


110.2 


86.0 




% of Total 


54.9% 


25.6% 


9.3% 


9.5% 


0.4% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


463 


114 


64 


21 


3 





665 


73.4 


67.0 




% of Total 


69.6% 


17.1% 


9.6% 


3.2% 


0.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






18 


Fel 


2,146 


417 


540 


573 


199 


31 


3,906 


125.4 


82.0 




% of Total 


54.9% 


10.7% 


13.8% 


14.7% 


5.1% 


0.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


301 


53 


78 


60 


4 


2 


498 


95.7 


70.5 




% of Total 


60.4% 


10.6% 


15.7% 


12.0% 


0.8% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






19A 


Fel 


1,027 


186 


218 


168 


51 


3 


1,653 


104.9 


67.0 




% of Total 


62.1% 


11.3% 


13.2% 


10.2% 


3.1% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


619 


158 


122 


145 


33 


3 


1,080 


109.2 


73.0 




% of Total 


57.3% 


14.6% 


11.3% 


13.4% 


3.1% 


0.3% 


100.0% 






19B 


Fel 


260 


73 


134 


219 


99 


6 


791 


191.9 


148.0 




% of Total 


32.9% 


9.2% 


16.9% 


27.7% 


12.5% 


0.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


566 


129 


181 


224 


93 


33 


1,226 


163.3 


103.0 




% of Total 


46.2% 


10.5% 


14.8% 


18.3% 


7.6% 


2.7% 


100.0% 






20 


Fel 


1,694 


241 


272 


306 


43 


12 


2,568 


91.9 


50.0 




% of Total 


66.0% 


9.4% 


10.6% 


11.9% 


1.7% 


0.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,499 


192 


288 


203 


28 


28 


2,238 


95.3 


57.0 




% of Total 


67.0% 


8.6% 


12.9% 


9.1% 


1.3% 


1.3% 


100.0% 






21 


Fel 


1,154 


472 


548 


406 


71 


41 


2,692 


134.8 


103.0 




% of Total 


42.9% 


17.5% 


20.4% 


15.1% 


2.6% 


1.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,223 


380 


323 


206 


70 


2 


2,204 


107.0 


82.0 




% of Total 


55.5% 


17.2% 


14.7% 


9.3% 


3.2% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






22 


Fel 


424 


119 


167 


225 


29 


7 


971 


138.5 


108.0 




% of Total 


43.7% 


12.3% 


17.2% 


23.2% 


3.0% 


0.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,243 


204 


211 


213 


21 


2 


1,894 


89.5 


59.0 




% of Total 


65.6% 


10.8% 


11.1% 


11.2% 


1.1% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






23 


Fel 


377 


107 


132 


121 


29 


3 


769 


124.8 


91.0 




% of Total 


49.0% 


13.9% 


17.2% 


15.7% 


3.8% 


0.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


364 


60 


80 


124 


35 


5 


668 


129.7 


77.5 




% of Total 


54.5% 


9.0% 


12.0% 


18.6% 


5.2% 


0.7% 


100.0% 







This table is provided because prosecutorial districts (shown in the map in Part II) do not coincide with superior court districts. 



170 



AGES OF FELONY (FEL) AND MISDEMEANOR (MIS) CASES DISPOSED 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS BY PROSECUTORIAL DISTRICT 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 - June 30, 1989 



Prosecutoi 


lal 






Ages of Disposed Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 


District 


0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


24 


Fel 


103 


44 


167 


213 


197 


8 


732 


263.9 


210.0 




% of Total 


14.1% 


6.0% 


22.8% 


29.1% 


26.9% 


1.1% 


100.0% 








Mis 


67 


12 


45 


66 


29 


5 


224 


215.2 


161.0 




% of Total 


29.9% 


5.4% 


20.1% 


29.5% 


12.9% 


2.2% 


100.0% 






25 


Fel 


523 


256 


473 


648 


183 


52 


2,135 


202.8 


159.0 




% of Total 


24.5% 


12.0% 


22.2% 


30.4% 


8.6% 


2.4% 


100.0% 








Mis 


782 


300 


425 


373 


90 


40 


2,010 


158.2 


111.0 




% of Total 


38.9% 


14.9% 


21.1% 


18.6% 


4.5% 


2.0% 


100.0% 






26 


Fel 


1,756 


389 


533 


470 


110 


23 


3,281 


119.6 


83.0 




% of Total 


53.5% 


11.9% 


16.2% 


14.3% 


3.4% 


0.7% 


100.0% 








Mis 


1,086 


228 


198 


188 


63 


24 


1,787 


114.8 


75.0 




% of Total 


60.8% 


12.8% 


11.1% 


10.5% 


3.5% 


1.3% 


100.0% 






27A 


Fel 


802 


339 


237 


200 


32 





1,610 


101.6 


91.0 




% of Total 


49.8% 


21.1% 


14.7% 


12.4% 


2.0% 


0.0% 


100.0% 








Mis 


396 


75 


169 


211 


51 


5 


907 


142.6 


105.0 




% of Total 


43.7% 


8.3% 


18.6% 


23.3% 


5.6% 


0.6% 


100.0% 






27B 


Fel 


386 


137 


110 


114 


38 


6 


791 


125.5 


95.0 




% of Total 


48.8% 


17.3% 


13.9% 


14.4% 


4.8% 


0.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


303 


61 


85 


73 


12 


4 


538 


107.0 


70.5 




% of Total 


56.3% 


11.3% 


15.8% 


13.6% 


2.2% 


0.7% 


100.0% 






28 


Fel 


558 


238 


246 


121 


10 


2 


1,175 


108.5 


96.0 




% of Total 


47.5% 


20.3% 


20.9% 


10.3% 


0.9% 


0.2% 


100.0% 








Mis 


254 


43 


52 


48 


1 





398 


84.4 


74.0 




% of Total 


63.8% 


10.8% 


13.1% 


12.1% 


0.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






29 


Fel 


458 


143 


284 


465 


87 


13 


1,450 


166.9 


142.0 




% of Total 


31.6% 


9.9% 


19.6% 


32.1% 


6.0% 


0.9% 


100.0% 








Mis 


438 


110 


130 


155 


24 


1 


858 


118.1 


90.0 




% of Total 


51.0% 


12.8% 


15.2% 


18.1% 


2.8% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






30 


Fel 


599 


163 


180 


231 


61 


22 


1,256 


149.1 


98.0 




% of Total 


47.7% 


13.0% 


14.3% 


18.4% 


4.9% 


1.8% 


100.0% 








Mis 


313 


69 


70 


91 


7 


6 


556 


115.7 


77.0 




% of Total 


56.3% 


12.4% 


12.6% 


16.4% 


1.3% 


1.1% 


100.0% 






State Totals Fel 


30,654 


7,538 


8,672 


9,094 


2,186 


309 


58,453 


120.9 


85.0 




% of Total 


52.4% 


12.9% 


14.8% 


15.6% 


3.7% 


0.5% 


100.0% 








Mis 


21,674 


4,090 


4,747 


4,405 


990 


266 


36,172 


107.7 


72.0 




% of Total 


59.9% 


11.3% 


13.1% 


12.2% 


2.7% 


0.7% 


100.0% 







This table is provided because prosecutorial districts (shown in the map in Part II) do not coincide with superior court districts. 



171 



PART IV, Section 2 



District Court Division 



Caseflow Data 



The District Court Division 



This section contains data tables and accompanying charts 
depicting the caseflow in 1988-89 of cases filed and disposed of 
in the State's district courts. 

Data are given on four major case classifications in the 
district court division: civil cases, juvenile proceedings, criminal 
cases, and infractions. Civil cases are divided into "small 
claims" cases assigned to magistrates; domestic relations cases 
(chiefly concerned with annulments, divorces, alimony, custody 
and support of children); and "general civil" cases. Juvenile 
proceedings are classified according to the nature of the offense 
or condition alleged in the petition that initiates the case. 
District court criminal cases are divided into motor vehicle 
cases (where the offense charged is defined in Chapter 20 of the 
North Carolina General Statutes) and non-motor vehicle 
criminal cases. 

Infractions are non-criminal violations of law punishable by 
a fine not to exceed $100 and not punishable by imprisonment. 
This category of cases in the district courts was created effective 
September 1, 1986, when the General Assembly decriminalized 
most minor traffic offenses. Prior to September 1, 1986, 
"infractions" were prosecuted as criminal motor vehicle cases. 
Therefore, for purposes of comparing present to past district 
court criminal caseloads, criminal motor vehicle caseloads of 
1985-86 and earlier are substantially comparable to the 
combined motor vehicle and infraction caseloads of 1986-87 
and later. (This comparison is not exact, since not all cases now 
prosecuted as infractions were criminal motor vehicle cases in 
prior years. For example, the infraction of purchase or 
possession of alcohol by a person age 19 or 20 was neither an 
infraction nor a criminal violation prior to September 1, 1986.) 

Magistrates may handle civil, criminal, and infraction cases 
in district court. When the plaintiff in a civil case requests, and 
the amount in controversy does not exceed $1,500, the case 
may be classified as a "small claim" civil action and assigned to 
a magistrate for hearing. In misdemeanor or infraction cases 
involving alcohol, traffic, hunting, fishing, and boating viola- 
tions, magistrates may accept written appearances, waivers of 
trial or hearing, and pleas of guilty or admissions of responsi- 
bility, and enter judgment in accord with the schedule of fines 
and penalties promulgated by chief district court judges. Also, 
magistrates may accept guilty pleas in other misdemeanor cases 
where the sentence cannot be in excess of 30 days or a $50 fine 
and may hear and enter judgment in worthless check cases 
where the amount involved is $1,000 or less, and any prison 
sentence imposed does not exceed 30 days. 

Appeals from magistrates' judgments in civil, criminal, and 
infraction cases are to the district court, with a district court 
judge presiding. 

The bar graphs that follow illustrate that district court 
criminal cases filed and disposed of in the 1988-89 year greatly 
outnumbered civil cases. Motor vehicle criminal cases and 
infractions accounted for over fifty percent of total filings and 
dispositions, and the non-motor vehicle criminal cases accounted 
for about twenty-five percent of filings and twenty-six percent 
of dispositions. As in past years, the greatest portion of district 
court civil filings and dispositions were small claims referred to 
magistrates. 

The large volume categories of infraction, criminal motor- 
vehicle, and civil magistrate cases are not reported to AOC by 
case file numbers. Therefore, it is not possible to obtain, by 



computer processing, the numbers of pending cases as of a 
given date or the ages of cases pending and ages of cases at 
disposition. These categories of cases are processed through the 
courts faster than any others, thus explaining the decision not to 
allocate personnel and computer resource to reporting these 
cases in the detail that is provided for other categories of cases. 

Also, juvenile proceedings and hearings on commitment or 
recommitment of persons to the State's mental hospital 
facilities are not reported to AOC by case file numbers. 

Two tables are provided on juvenile proceedings: offenses 
and conditions alleged, and numbers of adjudicatory hearings 
held. 

Data on district court hearings for mental hospital commit- 
ments and recommitments are reported in Part III, "Cost and 
Case Data on Representation of Indigents." 

Ages of district court cases pending on June 30, 1989, and 
ages of cases disposed of during 1988-89 are reported for the 
domestic relations, general civil and magistrate appeal /transfer, 
and criminal non-motor vehicle case categories. 

The tables for domestic relations and general civil and 
magistrate appeal/transfer cases show that the median age of 
such cases which were pending on June 30, 1989, was 176 and 
170 days, respectively, compared with a median age of 155 
days for domestic relations and 1 82 days for general civil and 
magistrate appeal/transfer cases pending on June 30, 1988. At 
the time of disposition during 1988-89, the median age of 
domestic relations cases was 52 days, and the median age for 
general civil and magistrate appeal/transfer cases was 112 
days, compared with a median age of 51 days at the time of 
disposition for domestic relations cases and 110 days for civil 
and magistrate appeal/transfer cases during 1987-88. 

For district court non-motor vehicle criminal cases, the 
median age for cases pending on June 30, 1989, was 58 days 
compared with a median age of 57 days for cases pending on 
June 30, 1988. The median age of cases in this category at the 
time of disposition during 1988-89 was 30 days, the same 
reported for these cases at the time of disposition during 
1987-88. 

The statewide total district court filings during 1988-89, not 
including juvenile cases and mental hospital commitment 
hearings, was 2,203,743 cases, compared with 2,004,447 
during 1987-88, an increase of 199,296 filings (9.9%). Criminal 
motor vehicle cases and infraction cases together account for 
much of this increase. There were 1,145,833 of these cases filed 
during 1988-89, compared with 1,028,252 during 1987-88, an 
increase of 117,581 cases (11.4%). There was an increase of 
42,180 cases (8.2%) in the non-motor vehicle criminal case 
category. 

There also was an increase (9.1%) in district court civil case 
filings (not including civil license revocation cases), from a total 
of 401,387 in 1987-88 to 437,966 in 1988-89. Most of this 
increase was in civil magistrate filings, from 277,336 cases in 
1987-88 to 308,029 cases in 1988-89, an increase of 11.1%. 
During 1988-89, compared to 1987-88, filings of general civil 
cases increased by 10.3%, and filings of civil license revocation 
cases increased by 4.9%. 

Total district court case filings over the past decade have 
increased in every year but one (1980-81 to 1981-82). This 
overall upward trend continued in 1988-89. 



175 



FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 
July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



678,189 



308,029 3(X)856 




63,054 



N/A 




DOMESTIC 
RELATIONS 



GENERAL CIVIL CIVIL LICENSE 

CIVIL MAGISTRATE REVOCATION 



INFRACTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL NON- 

MOTOR VEHICLE MOTOR VEHICLE 



□ Fili 



ngs 



Dispositions 



Criminal motor vehicle cases and infractions make up more 
than half the district court caseload. The civil case categories 
together ("domestic, general civil, civil magistrate, and civil 
license revocations) accounted for 501,020 (22.7%) of all 
filings. The 63,054 civil license revocation filings shown are 



automatic, 10-day driver license suspensions imposed on 
drivers whose breath tests show a blood alcohol concentration 
of 0.10 or more when arrested on suspicion of impaired driving. 
These cases are counted only at filing. 



176 



CASELOAD TRENDS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 
1979-80 — 1988-89 



N 
U 
M 
B 
E 
R 

O 
F 

C 
A 
S 
E 

S 




2,000,000 



1,500,000 



1,000,000 



500,000 



79-80 80-81 81-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 87-88 



88-89 



During the nineteen-eighties, filings and dispositions in the 
district courts (including all civil, infraction, and criminal cases) 
have increased every year except fiscal 1980-81 to 1981-82. 
During 1988-89, there were 2,203,743 total filings (including 



civil license revocation filings), and 2,072,246 dispositions (not 
including civil license revocation cases, which are counted only 
at the time of filing). Both filings and dispositions increased by 
about 10% from 1987-88 to 1988-89. 



177 



FILING AND DISPOSITION TRENDS OF CIVIL CASES 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

1979-80 — 1988-89 



N 
U 

M 

B 
F 
R 

O 
F 

C 

A 
S 
E 

S 




J* 

Dispositions 



Domestic and General Civil Cases 



Filings 



Dispositions 



450,000 



300,000 



150,000 



79-80 



80-81 



81-82 



82-83 



83-84 



84-85 



85-86 



86-87 



87-88 



88-89 



For several years, civil magistrate (often known as small 
claims) case filings have increased more quickly than other civil 
district court filings. From 1 986-87 to 1 987-88, civil magistrate 



filings increased by 12.1%, and from 1987-88 to 1988-89 by 
11.1%. Total civil district court filings increased by 9.1% from 
1987-88 to 1988-89. 



178 



CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



72,151 



69,379 



57,786 



34,061 







54,389 



37,458 



29,793 



32,565 



!■•■■■■■■■ 



' 



: ■ 



mmmi 



GENERAL CIVIL AND CIVIL 
MAGISTRATE APPEALS/TRANSFERS 

B Begin Pending I I Filings 



DOMESTIC RELATIONS 



□ Di: 



spositions 



53 End Pending 



In 1988-89, civil case filings exceeded dispositions. A 10.3% 
increase in filings of general civil cases and appeals of 
magistrates' cases, coupled with a 9.7% increase in dispositions, 
led to a 10.0% increase in the number of cases pending at the 



end of the year, compared to the number of cases pending at the 
beginning of the fiscal year. The number of pending domestic 
relations cases also increased by 9.3%. 



179 



CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES FILED 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



53,628 




URESA 



IV-D CHILD 
SUPPORT 



NON IV-D 

CHILD 
SUPPORT 



OTHER 



2.5% 



DOMESTIC RELATIONS 

13.0% 10.6% 



29.4% 



GENERAL 
CIVIL 



41.3% 



MAGISTRATE 

APPEALS/ 
TRANSFERS 



3.2% 



"URESA" stands for the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of 
Support Act. and refers to actions enforcing child support 
orders entered by judges in one state or county by the courts in 
another. "IV-D Child Support" refers to actions initiated by 
counties or the Department of Human Resources to collect 
child support owed to social services clients. "Non IV-D Child 
Support" actions are initiated by custodial parents themselves. 
The "Other" category includes actions such as annulments and 
divorces in which child support is not an issue. "General Civil" 



refers to other civil cases in district court (contracts, collections, 
negligence, etc.), and "Magistrate Appeals/Transfers" are 
appeals from small claims court. URESA case filings decreased 
from 5,811 in 1987-88 to 3,264 in 1988-89. The largest 
numerical increase in civil district court filings was in the 
general civil category, which increased by 5,319 cases to 
53,628. The largest proportional increase came in IV-D child 
support cases, and was 12.9%. 



180 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1,1988 --June 30, 1989 



Domestic Relations 



General Civil and Magistrate Appeals/Transfers 





Begin 










End 


Begin 










End 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 


Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/88 


Filings 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


7/1/88 


Filings 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


District 1 


























Camden 


18 


37 


55 


36 


65.5% 


19 


14 


10 


24 


13 


54.2% 


11 


Chowan 


56 


167 


223 


168 


75.3% 


55 


53 


63 


116 


65 


56.0% 


51 


Currituck 


53 


116 


169 


109 


64.5% 


60 


60 


73 


133 


60 


45.1% 


73 


Dare 


99 


223 


322 


216 


67.1% 


106 


162 


281 


443 


249 


56.2% 


194 


Gates 


25 


50 


75 


55 


73.3% 


20 


12 


27 


39 


20 


51.3% 


19 


Pasquotank 


150 


273 


423 


286 


67.6% 


137 


107 


142 


249 


144 


57.8% 


105 


Perquimans 


63 


84 


147 


77 


52.4% 


70 


28 


51 


79 


41 


51.9% 


38 


District Totals 


464 


950 


1,414 


947 


67.0% 


467 


436 


647 


1,083 


592 


54.7% 


491 


District 2 


























Beaufort 


189 


415 


604 


401 


66.4% 


203 


131 


165 


296 


153 


51.7% 


143 


Hyde 


20 


45 


65 


40 


61.5% 


25 


11 


17 


28 


14 


50.0% 


14 


Martin 


110 


273 


383 


240 


62.7% 


143 


37 


69 


106 


52 


49.1% 


54 


Tyrrell 


7 


21 


28 


18 


64.3% 


10 


8 


12 


20 


16 


80.0% 


4 


Washington 


64 


159 


223 


184 


82.5% 


39 


25 


59 


8-4 


58 


69.0% 


26 


District Totals 


390 


913 


1,303 


883 


67.8% 


420 


212 


322 


534 


293 


54.9% 


241 


District 3 


























Carteret 


203 


590 


793 


607 


76.5% 


186 


147 


409 


556 


408 


73.4% 


148 


Craven 


406 


992 


1,398 


1,015 


72.6% 


383 


254 


713 


967 


737 


76.2% 


230 


Pamlico 


22 


88 


110 


82 


74.5% 


28 


10 


33 


43 


31 


72.1% 


12 


Pitt 


265 


1,099 


1,364 


1,012 


74.2% 


352 


345 


761 


1,106 


847 


76.6% 


259 


District Totals 


896 


2,769 


3,665 


2,716 


74.1% 


949 


756 


1,916 


2,672 


2,023 


75.7% 


649 


District 4 


























Duplin 


149 


438 


587 


441 


75.1% 


146 


100 


171 


271 


147 


54.2% 


124 


Jones 


46 


75 


121 


84 


69.4% 


37 


49 


18 


67 


42 


62.7% 


25 


Onslow 


889 


1,855 


2,744 


1,751 


63.8% 


993 


561 


827 


1,388 


619 


44.6% 


769 


Sampson 


131 


572 


703 


569 


80.9% 


134 


135 


344 


479 


390 


81.4% 


89 


District Totals 


1,215 


2,940 


4,155 


2,845 


68.5% 


1,310 


845 


1,360 


2,205 


1,198 


54.3% 


1,007 


District 5 


























New Hanover 


699 


1,693 


2,392 


1,748 


73.1% 


644 


1,074 


1,716 


2,790 


1,654 


59.3% 


1,136 


Pender 


115 


263 


378 


284 


75.1% 


94 


125 


199 


324 


193 


59.6% 


131 


District Totals 


814 


1,956 


2,770 


2,032 


73.4% 


738 


1,199 


1,915 


3,114 


1,847 


59.3% 


1,267 


District 6 


























Bertie 


67 


275 


342 


279 


81.6% 


63 


37 


102 


139 


80 


57.6% 


59 


Halifax 


224 


759 


983 


714 


72.6% 


269 


86 


204 


290 


198 


68.3% 


92 


Hertford 


96 


293 


389 


282 


72.5% 


107 


61 


132 


193 


142 


73.6% 


51 


Northampton 


71 


137 


208 


150 


72.1% 


58 


40 


81 


121 


72 


59.5% 


49 


District Totals 


458 


1,464 


1,922 


1,425 


74.1% 


497 


224 


519 


743 


492 


66.2% 


251 



181 



District 7 

Edgecombe 

Nash 

Wilson 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

General Civil and Magistrate Appeals/Transfers 



Domestic Relations 



Begin End Begin End 

Pending Total % Caseload Pending Pending Total % Caseload Pending 

7/1/88 Filings Caseload Disposed Disposed 6/30/89 7/1/88 Filings Caseload Disposed Disposed 6/30/89 



189 618 807 607 

265 1,028 1,293 985 

162 720 882 699 



75.2% 


200 


161 


317 


478 


310 


64.9% 


168 


76.2% 


308 


256 


699 


955 


610 


63.9% 


345 


79.3% 


183 


208 


490 


698 


424 


60.7% 


274 



District Totals 



616 2,366 2,982 2,291 



76.8% 



691 



625 1,506 2,131 1,344 



63.1% 



787 



District 8 

Greene 
Lenoir 
Wavne 



21 83 

308 599 

517 1,414 



104 81 

907 642 

1,931 1,320 



77.9% 
70.8% 
68.4% 



23 
265 
611 



39 
233 
526 



85 
528 
910 



124 

761 

1,436 



83 
507 
881 



66.9% 
66.6% 
61.4% 



41 
254 
555 



District Totals 



846 2,096 2,942 2,043 



69.4% 



899 



798 



1,523 2,321 1,471 



63.4% 



850 



District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 



102 
116 

61 
16? 

75 



322 
278 
327 
568 
193 



424 
394 
388 
731 
268 



316 
297 
284 
588 
199 



74.5% 
75.4% 
73.2% 
80.4% 
74.3% 



108 

97 

104 

143 

69 



73 
76 
63 
131 
55 



277 
145 
169 
277 
90 



350 
221 
232 
408 
145 



224 
152 
137 
234 
85 



64.0% 
68.8% 
59.1% 
57.4% 
58.6% 



126 
69 
95 

174 
60 



District Totals 



517 1,688 2,205 1,684 



76.4% 



521 



398 



958 1,356 



832 



61.4% 



524 



District 10 

Wake 



3,280 3,949 7,229 3,515 



48.6% 3,714 4,300 6,721 11,021 6,205 



56.3% 4,816 



District 11 

Harnett 

Johnston 

Lee 



241 743 984 742 

324 980 1,304 986 

181 565 746 541 



75.4% 


242 


75.6% 


318 


72.5% 


205 



280 760 1,040 609 58.6% 431 

424 765 1,189 807 67.9% 382 

269 610 879 576 65.5% 303 



District Totals 



746 2,288 3,034 2,269 



74.8% 



765 



973 2,135 3,108 1,992 



64.1% 1,116 



District 12 

Cumberland 



2,205 5,073 7,278 5,054 



69.4% 2,224 



823 1,654 2,477 1,711 



69.1% 



766 



District 13 

Bladen 

Brunswick 

Columbus 

District Totals 



82 349 431 369 85.6% 62 

354 515 869 489 56.3% 380 

390 752 1,142 747 65.4% 395 

826 1,616 2,442 1,605 65.7% 837 



158 254 412 303 73.5% 109 

611 452 1,063 532 50.0% 531 

488 460 948 537 56.6% 411 

1,257 1,166 2,423 1,372 56.6% 1,051 



District 14 

Durham 



1,112 1,949 3,061 1,725 



56.4% 1,336 



1,270 1,993 3,263 2,099 



64.3% 1,164 



District 15A 

Alamance 



343 1,249 1,592 1,161 



72.9% 431 



455 742 1,197 635 



53.0% 



562 



182 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 

CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

General Civil and Magistrate Appeals/Transfers 



Domestic Relations 



Begin End Begin End 

Pending Total % Caseload Pending Pending Total % Caseload Pending 

7/1/88 Filings Caseload Disposed Disposed 6/30/89 7/1/88 Filings Caseload Disposed Disposed 6/30/89 



District 15B 


























Chatham 


102 


326 


428 


307 


71.7% 


121 


64 


141 


205 


108 


52.7% 


97 


Orange 


297 


613 


910 


636 


69.9% 


274 


434 


512 


946 


647 


68.4% 


299 


District Totals 


399 


939 


1,338 


943 


70.5% 


395 


498 


653 


1,151 


755 


65.6% 


396 


District 16A 


























Hoke 


109 


331 


440 


370 


84.1% 


70 


50 


126 


176 


121 


68.8% 


55 


Scotland 


123 


425 


548 


401 


73.2% 


147 


98 


237 


335 


187 


55.8% 


148 


District Totals 


232 


756 


988 


771 


78.0% 


217 


148 


363 


511 


308 


60.3% 


203 


District 16B 


























Robeson 


311 


1,126 


1,437 


1,011 


70.4% 


426 


400 


688 


1,088 


621 


57.1% 


467 


District 17A 


























Caswell 


33 


137 


170 


122 


71.8% 


48 


36 


61 


97 


64 


66.0% 


33 


Rockingham 


227 


774 


1,001 


772 


77.1% 


229 


252 


724 


976 


654 


67.0% 


322 


District Totals 


260 


911 


1,171 


894 


76.3% 


277 


288 


785 


1,073 


718 


66.9% 


355 


District 17B 


























Stokes 


81 


232 


313 


230 


73.5% 


83 


56 


98 


154 


85 


55.2% 


69 


Surry 


140 


617 


757 


555 


73.3% 


202 


97 


287 


384 


228 


59.4% 


156 


District Totals 


221 


849 


1,070 


785 


73.4% 


285 


153 


385 


538 


313 


58.2% 


225 


District 18 


























Guilford 


2,352 


4,054 


6,406 


3,493 


54.5% 


2,913 


4,120 


4,553 


8,673 


4,468 


51.5% 


4,205 


District 19A 


























Cabarrus 


282 


965 


1,247 


930 


74.6% 


317 


337 


666 


1,003 


494 


49.3% 


509 


Rowan 


215 


980 


1,195 


890 


74.5% 


305 


274 


651 


925 


430 


46.5% 


495 


District Totals 


497 


1,945 


2,442 


1,820 


74.5% 


622 


611 


1,317 


1,928 


924 


47.9% 


1,004 


District 19B 


























Montgomery 


105 


252 


357 


205 


57.4% 


152 


166 


252 


418 


211 


50.5% 


207 


Randolph 


290 


813 


1,103 


805 


73.0% 


298 


167 


473 


640 


450 


70.3% 


190 


District Totals 


395 


1,065 


1,460 


1,010 


69.2% 


450 


333 


725 


1,058 


661 


62.5% 


397 


District 20 


























Anson 


136 


317 


453 


234 


51.7% 


219 


118 


100 


218 


76 


34.9% 


142 


Moore 


281 


458 


739 


415 


56.2% 


324 


484 


393 


877 


341 


38.9% 


536 


Richmond 


223 


601 


824 


497 


60.3% 


327 


224 


436 


660 


360 


54.5% 


300 


Stanly 


245 


397 


642 


360 


56.1% 


282 


342 


312 


654 


226 


34.6% 


428 


Union 


287 


684 


971 


677 


69.7% 


294 


380 


470 


850 


374 


44.0% 


476 


District Totals 


1,172 


2,457 


3,629 


2,183 


60.2% 


1,446 


1,548 


1,711 


3,259 


1,377 


42.3% 


1,882 



183 



District 21 

Forsyth 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

General Civil and Magistrate Appeals/Transfers 



Domestic Relations 



Begin End Begin End 

Pending Total % Caseload Pending Pending Total % Caseload Pending 

7/1/88 Pilings Caseload Disposed Disposed 6/30/89 7/1/88 Filings Caseload Disposed Disposed 6/30/89 



1,193 2,789 3,982 2,817 



70.7% 1,165 



1,838 2,612 4,450 2,945 



66.2% 1,505 



District 22 

Alexander 
Davidson 
Davie 
Iredell 



44 
518 

68 
256 



212 
1,002 

216 
1,005 



256 
1,520 

284 
1,261 



196 
947 
221 
941 



76.6% 
62.3% 
77.8% 
74.6% 



60 
573 

63 
320 



35 
330 

93 
316 



80 
639 
129 
634 



115 
969 

222 
950 



84 
549 
150 
586 



73.0% 
56.7% 
67.6% 
61.7% 



31 
420 

72 
364 



District Totals 



886 



2,435 3,321 2,305 



69.4% 1,016 



774 1,482 2,256 1,369 



60.7% 



887 



District 23 

Alleghany 
Ashe 
Wilkes 
Yadkin 



21 

71 

104 

84 



112 
196 
615 
217 



133 
267 
719 
301 



92 
198 
598 
208 



69.2% 
74.2% 
83.2% 
69.1% 



41 

69 

121 

93 



27 

44 

178 

84 



49 

92 

801 

122 



76 
136 
979 
206 



53 

82 

662 

113 



69.7% 
60.3% 
67.6% 
54.9% 



23 

54 

317 

93 



District Totals 



280 1,140 1,420 1,096 



77.2% 



324 



333 



1,064 



1,397 



910 



65.1% 



487 



District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 



74 
60 
49 
89 
55 



110 
137 
120 
265 
136 



184 
197 
169 
354 
191 



117 
132 
112 
225 
149 



63.6% 
67.0% 
66.3% 
63.6% 
78.0% 



67 
65 
57 
129 
42 



94 

20 

26 

107 

21 



90 

27 

121 

323 

40 



184 

47 

147 

430 

61 



124 
31 
94 

281 
32 



67.4% 
66.0% 
63.9% 
65.3% 
52.5% 



60 
16 
53 
149 
29 



District Totals 



327 



768 1,095 



735 



67.1% 



360 



268 



601 



869 



562 



64.7% 



307 



District 25 

Burke 

Caldwell 

Catawba 



260 766 1,026 774 

264 752 1,016 776 

513 1,521 2,034 1,582 



75.4% 


252 


140 


509 


649 


428 


65.9% 


221 


76.4% 


240 


236 


571 


807 


512 


63.4% 


295 


77.8% 


452 


313 


940 


1,253 


874 


69.8% 


379 



District Totals 1,037 3,039 4,076 3,132 



76.8% 



944 



689 2,020 2,709 1,814 



67.0% 



895 



District 26 

Mecklenburg 



2,375 5,335 7,710 5,042 



65.4% 2,668 



5,526 8,664 14,190 7,927 



55.9% 6,263 



District 27A 

Gaston 



!19 2,422 3,241 2,440 



75.3% 801 



369 931 1,300 793 



61.0% 507 



DLstrlct 27B 

Cleveland 
Lincoln 

District Totals 



240 1,217 1,457 1,223 83.9% 234 

89 488 577 496 86.0% 81 

329 1,705 2,034 1,719 84.5% 315 



102 471 573 438 76.4% 135 

55 260 315 230 73.0% 85 

157 731 888 668 75.2% 220 



DLstrlct 28 

Buncombe 



796 2,163 2,959 2,000 



67.6% 959 



641 1,534 2,175 1,470 



67.6% 705 



184 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) 
CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 



July 1,1988 -June 30, 1989 



Domestic Relations 



General Civil and Magistrate Appeals/Transfers 





Begin 










End 


Begin 










End 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 


Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/88 


Filings 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


7/1/88 


Filings 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


District 29 


























Henderson 


189 


602 


791 


523 


66.1% 


268 


207 


476 


683 


405 


59.3% 


278 


McDowell 


124 


340 


464 


354 


76.3% 


110 


67 


156 


223 


170 


76.2% 


53 


Polk 


21 


63 


84 


60 


71.4% 


24 


14 


55 


69 


42 


60.9% 


27 


Rutherford 


195 


559 


754 


606 


80.4% 


148 


82 


226 


308 


207 


67.2% 


101 


Transylvania 


101 


216 


317 


192 


60.6% 


125 


79 


126 


205 


148 


72.2% 


57 



District Totals 630 1,780 2,410 1,735 



72.0% 



675 



449 1,039 1,488 



972 



65.3% 



516 



District 30 


























Cherokee 


75 


161 


236 


159 


67.4% 


77 


21 


129 


150 


103 


68.7% 


47 


Clay 


27 


37 


64 


51 


79.7% 


13 


16 


46 


62 


41 


66.1% 


21 


Graham 


22 


66 


88 


67 


76.1% 


21 


17 


34 


51 


34 


66.7% 


17 


Haywood 


212 


433 


645 


448 


69.5% 


197 


130 


288 


418 


210 


50.2% 


208 


Jackson 


80 


211 


291 


210 


72.2% 


81 


62 


184 


246 


157 


63.8% 


89 


Macon 


96 


210 


306 


220 


71.9% 


86 


89 


125 


214 


126 


58.9% 


88 


Swain 


42 


89 


131 


98 


74.8% 


33 


12 


45 


57 


37 


64.9% 


20 


District Totals 


554 


1,207 


1,761 


1,253 


71.2% 


508 


347 


851 


1,198 


708 


59.1% 


490 


State Totals 


29,793 


72,151 


101,944 


69,379 


68.1% 


32,565 


34,061 


57,786 


91,847 


54,389 


59.2% 


37,458 



185 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL 
(NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



Judge's Final Order or 

Judgment Without Trial 

(26,417) 



Clerk (21,569) 



Voluntary Dismissal 
(22.691) 




Other (6,833) 



0.4% Trial by Jury (505) 



Trial by Judge (45,753) 



Most civil cases in the district courts are disposed of by judges, 
either before trial or with a bench (non-jury) trial. The "Other" 
category here includes such actions as removal to federal court 



or an order from another state closing a Uniform Reciprocal 
Enforcement of Support case. 



186 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1,1988 --June 30, 1989 

Judge's Final 
Order or 







Trial by 


Trial by 


Voluntary 


Judgment 






Total 






Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


Without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 


Disposed 


District 1 


















Camden 


Gen 





1 


3 





8 


1 


13 




Dom 





5 


5 


22 





4 


36 


Chowan 


Gen 


1 


10 


24 





18 


12 


65 




Dom 





77 


19 


61 


4 


7 


168 


Currituck 


Gen 





2 


27 


11 


18 


2 


60 




Dom 





54 


24 


30 





1 


109 


Dare 


Gen 





12 


105 


31 


96 


5 


249 




Dom 





130 


28 


43 





15 


216 


Gates 


Gen 





3 


8 





7 


2 


20 




Dom 


7 


18 


4 


21 


1 


4 


55 


Pasquotank 


Gen 


1 


13 


66 


10 


47 


7 


144 




Dom 





184 


27 


67 


1 


7 


286 


Perquimans 


Gen 





4 


20 





17 





41 




Dom 





50 


9 


14 


2 


2 


77 


District Totals 


Gen 


2 


45 


253 


52 


211 


29 


592 




% of Total 


0.3% 


7.6% 


42.7% 


8.8% 


35.6% 


4.9% 


100.0% 




Dom 


7 


518 


116 


258 


8 


40 


947 




% of Total 


0.7% 


54.7% 


12.2% 


27.2% 


0.8% 


4.2% 


100.0% 


District 2 


















Beaufort 


Gen 


4 


13 


54 


17 


63 


2 


153 




Dom 





233 


16 


128 


8 


16 


401 


Hyde 


Gen 





2 


7 


4 





1 


14 




Dom 





18 


4 


16 





2 


40 


Martin 


Gen 


1 


5 


19 


1 


24 


2 


52 




Dom 





135 


17 


75 





13 


240 


Tyrrell 


Gen 





3 


6 


6 





1 


16 




Dom 





2 


1 


13 





2 


18 


Washington 


Gen 





11 


18 


2 


22 


5 


58 




Dom 





96 


7 


73 





8 


184 


District Totals 


Gen 


5 


34 


104 


30 


109 


11 


293 




% of Total 


1.7% 


11.6% 


35.5% 


10.2% 


37.2% 


3.8% 


100.0% 




Dom 





484 


45 


305 


8 


41 


883 




% of Total 


0.0% 


54.8% 


5.1% 


34.5% 


0.9% 


4.6% 


100.0% 



♦General civil cases and appeals and transfers from magistrates are identified as Gen, and domestic relations cases as Dom. 



187 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 







July 1,1988 -June 30, 1989 


















Judge's Final 


















Order or 












Trial by 


Trial by 


Voluntary 


Judgment 






Total 






Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


Without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 


Disposed 


District 3 


















Carteret 


Gen 


4 


50 


115 


78 


131 


30 


408 




Dom 


? 


429 


32 


78 





65 


607 


Craven 


Gen 


1 


24 


184 


127 


332 


69 


737 




Dom 





562 


51 


260 


5 


137 


1,015 


Pamlico 


Gen 





2 


12 


7 


6 


4 


31 




Dom 





27 


4 


35 


1 


15 


82 


Pitt 


Gen 


1 


114 


281 


81 


208 


162 


847 




Dom 





850 


40 


18 


3 


101 


1,012 


District Totals 


Gen 


6 


190 


592 


293 


677 


265 


2,023 




% of Total 


0.3% 


9.4% 


29.3% 


14.5% 


33.5% 


13.1% 


100.0% 




Dom 


3 


1,868 


127 


391 


9 


318 


2,716 




% of Total 


0.1% 


68.8% 


4.7% 


14.4% 


0.3% 


11.7% 


100.0% 


District 4 


















Duplin 


Gen 





17 


58 


21 


43 


8 


147 




Dom 





162 


21 


216 


1 


41 


441 


Jones 


Gen 





14 


5 


12 


7 


4 


42 




Dom 





25 


7 


42 


1 


9 


84 


Onslow 


Gen 





141 


206 


49 


171 


52 


619 




Dom 





1,335 


86 


228 


1 


101 


1,751 


Sampson 


Gen 


3 


28 


142 


24 


169 


24 


390 




Dom 


2 


245 


46 


244 


5 


27 


569 


District Totals 


Gen 


3 


200 


411 


106 


390 


88 


1,198 




% of Total 


0.3% 


16.7% 


34.3% 


8.8% 


32.6% 


7.3% 


100.0% 




Dom 


2 


1,767 


160 


730 


8 


178 


2,845 




% of Total 


0.1% 


62.1% 


5.6% 


25.7% 


0.3% 


6.3% 


100.0% 


District 5 


















New Hanover 


Gen 


12 


170 


552 


232 


552 


136 


1,654 




Dom 


2 


892 


169 


590 


3 


92 


1,748 


Pender 


Gen 


2 


13 


76 


16 


77 


9 


193 




Dom 


2 


95 


14 


143 


4 


26 


284 


District Totals 


Gen 


14 


183 


628 


248 


629 


145 


1,847 




% of Total 


0.8% 


9.9% 


34.0% 


13.4% 


34.1% 


7.9% 


100.0% 




Dom 


4 


987 


183 


733 


7 


118 


2,032 




% of Total 


0.2% 


48.6% 


9.0% 


36.1% 


0.3% 


5.8% 


100.0% 



•General civil cases and appeals and transfers from magistrates are identified as Gen, and domestic relations cases as Dom. 



188 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 
July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Judge's Final 
Order or 
Trial by Trial by Voluntary 
Jury Judge Dismissal W 



District 6 










Bertie 


Gen 


1 


6 


31 




Dom 





82 


14 


Halifax 


Gen 


4 


38 


51 




Dom 





215 


16 


Hertford 


Gen 





30 


27 




Dom 





161 


14 


Northampton 


Gen 





12 


20 




Dom 





79 


9 


District Totals 


Gen 


5 


86 


129 




% of Total 


1.0% 


17.5% 


26.2% 




Dom 





537 


53 




% of Total 


0.0% 


37.7% 


3.7% 


District 7 

Edgecombe 


Gen 


3 


22 


84 




Dom 


1 


271 


42 


Nash 


Gen 





85 


170 




Dom 





540 


33 


Wilson 


Gen 


3 


41 


160 




Dom 


1 


478 


25 


District Totals 


Gen 


6 


148 


414 




% of Total 


0.4% 


11.0% 


30.8% 




Dom 


2 


1,289 


100 




% of Total 


0.1% 


56.3% 


4.4% 


District 8 










Greene 


Gen 





33 


18 




Dom 





8 


8 


Lenoir 


Gen 


10 


35 


152 




Dom 





418 


69 


Wayne 


Gen 


4 


84 


340 




Dom 


4 


793 


149 


District Totals 


Gen 


14 


152 


510 




% of Total 


1.0% 


10.3% 


34.7% 




Dom 


4 


1,219 


226 




% of Total 


0.2% 


59.7% 


11.1% 



gment 






Total 


ut Trial 


Clerk 


Other 


Disposed 


8 


32 


2 


80 


178 


2 


3 


279 


36 


68 


1 


198 


470 


2 


11 


714 


12 


48 


25 


142 


64 


2 


41 


282 


2 


31 


7 


72 


47 





15 


150 


58 


179 


35 


492 


11.8% 


36.4% 


7.1% 


100.0% 


759 


6 


70 


1,425 


53.3% 


0.4% 


4.9% 


100.0% 


27 


132 


42 


310 


241 


2 


50 


607 


38 


317 





610 


385 


5 


22 


985 


46 


171 


3 


424 


184 


2 


9 


699 


111 


620 


45 


1,344 


8.3% 


46.1% 


3.3% 


100.0% 


810 


9 


81 


2,291 


35.4% 


0.4% 


3.5% 


100.0% 


22 


9 


1 


83 


58 





7 


81 


78 


231 


1 


507 


151 


1 


3 


642 


48 


346 


59 


881 


291 


12 


71 


1,320 


148 


586 


61 


1,471 


10.1% 


39.8% 


4.1% 


100.0% 


500 


13 


81 


2,043 


24.5% 


0.6% 


4.0% 


100.0% 



♦General civil cases and appeals and transfers from magistrates are identified as Gen, and domestic relations cases as Dom. 



189 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Judge's Final 
Order or 
Trial by Trial by Voluntary Judgment 
Jury Judge Dismissal Without Trial 



District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 
Person 
Vance 
Warren 



Gen 

Dom 

Gen 

Dom 

Gen 

Dom 

Gen 

Dom 

Gen 

Dom 



39 
151 

10 
133 

19 
182 

39 

253 

9 

72 



72 
44 
58 
18 
41 
17 
59 
49 
25 
23 



12 
101 

27 
74 

9 
75 

3 

246 

19 

98 



Clerk 

88 

7 
44 
55 
49 


107 

2 
25 





Total 
Other Disposed 



9 
13 
10 
17 
13 
10 
25 
38 
2 
1 



224 
316 
152 
297 
137 
284 
234 
588 
85 
199 



District Totals Gen 19 116 255 70 313 59 832 

% of Total 2.3% 13.9% 30.6% 8.4% 37.6% 7.1% 100.0% 

Dom 5 791 151 594 64 79 1,684 

% of Total 0.3% 47.0% 9.0% 35.3% 3.8% 4.7% 100.0% 



District 10 

Wake 



Gen 

% of Total 

Dom 

% of Total 



18 
0.3% 


0.0% 



96 

1.5% 
2,021 
57.5% 



1,612 
26.0% 
187 
5.3% 



1,129 

18.2% 
1,089 

31.0% 



2,912 
46.9% 
3 
0.1% 



438 6,205 

7.1% 100.0% 

215 3,515 

6.1% 100.0% 



District 11 

Harnett 

Johnston 
Lee 



Gen 

Dom 

Gen 

Dom 

Gen 

Dom 



9 

2 

12 

7 
1 



63 
346 

22 
625 

45 
362 



311 
60 
306 
125 
208 
61 



74 
320 
159 
224 

43 
115 



147 
2 

305 
6 

273 
1 



5 

12 

3 

6 



1 



609 

742 
807 
986 
576 
541 



District Totals 



Gen 

% of Total 

Dom 

% of Total 



28 

1.4% 

3 

0.1% 



130 
6.5% 
1,333 
58.7% 



825 
41.4% 
246 
10.8% 



276 
13.9% 
659 
29.0% 



725 
36.4% 
9 
0.4% 



8 1,992 

0.4% 100.0% 

19 2,269 

0.8% 100.0% 



District 12 

Cumberland 



Gen 

% of Total 

Dom 

% of Total 



10 
0.6% 

1 
0.0% 



328 
19.2% 
2,880 
57.0% 



477 

27.9% 

446 



125 
7.3% 
1,136 

22.5% 



561 
32.8% 

13 

0.3% 



210 1,711 

12.3% 100.0% 

578 5,054 

11.4% 100.0% 



♦General civil cases and appeals and transfers from magistrates are identified as Gen, and domestic relations cases as Dom. 



190 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 
July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Judge's Final 
Order or 
Trial by Trial by Voluntary 
Jury Judge Dismissal M 



District 13 










Bladen 


Gen 


5 


30 


126 




Dom 


2 


133 


36 


Brunswick 


Gen 


3 


67 


238 




Dom 


1 


217 


63 


Columbus 


Gen 


15 


81 


194 




Dom 


2 


331 


90 


District Totals 


Gen 


23 


178 


558 




% of Total 


1.7% 


13.0% 


40.7% 




Dom 


5 


681 


189 




% of Total 


0.3% 


42.4% 


1 1 .8% 


District 14 










Durham 


Gen 


10 


82 


643 




% of Total 


0.5% 


3.9% 


30.6% 




Dom 





995 


91 




% of Total 


0.0% 


57.7% 


5.3% 


District 15A 










Alamance 


Gen 


9 


99 


198 




% of Total 


1.4% 


15.6% 


31.2% 




Dom 





714 


HI 




% of Total 


0.0% 


61.5% 


9.6% 


District 15B 










Chatham 


Gen 


4 


15 


38 




Dom 





151 


25 


Orange 


Gen 


3 


170 


216 




Dom 





388 


44 


District Totals 


Gen 


7 


185 


254 




% of Total 


0.9% 


24.5% 


33.6% 




Dom 





539 


69 




% of Total 


0.0% 


57.2% 


7.3% 


District 16A 










Hoke 


Gen 





31 


49 




Dom 


1 


126 


60 


Scotland 


Gen 


1 


31 


63 




Dom 





196 


15 


District Totals 


Gen 


1 


62 


112 




% of Total 


0.3% 


20.1% 


36.4% 




Dom 


1 


322 


75 




% of Total 


0.1% 


41.8% 


9.7% 



jment 






Total 


ut Trial 


Clerk 


Other 


Disposed 


32 


104 


6 


303 


178 


3 


17 


369 


73 


93 


58 


532 


174 





34 


489 


74 


125 


48 


537 


268 


2 


54 


747 


179 


322 


112 


1,372 


13.0% 


23.5% 


8.2% 


100.0% 


620 


5 


105 


1,605 


38.6% 


0.3% 


6.5% 


100.0% 


329 


716 


319 


2,099 


15.7% 


34.1% 


15.2% 


100.0% 


628 


1 


10 


1,725 


36.4% 


0.1% 


0.6% 


100.0% 


43 


260 


26 


635 


6.8% 


40.9% 


4.1% 


100.0% 


291 


9 


36 


1,161 


25.1% 


0.8% 


3.1% 


100.0% 


12 


31 


8 


108 


103 


3 


25 


307 


9 


169 


80 


647 


142 


2 


60 


636 


21 


200 


88 


755 


2.8% 


26.5% 


11.7% 


100.0% 


245 


5 


85 


943 


26.0% 


0.5% 


9.0% 


100.0% 


1 


40 





121 


183 








370 


5 


77 


10 


187 


173 


1 


16 


401 


6 


117 


10 


308 


1.9% 


38.0% 


3.2% 


100.0% 


356 


1 


16 


771 


46.2% 


0.1% 


2.1% 


100.0% 



♦General civil cases and appeals and transfers from magistrates are identified as Gen, and domestic relations cases as Dom. 



191 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 







* 


July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 


















Judge's Final 


















Order or 












Trial by 


Trial by 


Voluntary 


Judgment 






Total 






Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


Without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 


Disposed 


District 16B 


















Robeson 


Gen 


5 


120 


148 


10 


327 


11 


621 




% of Total 


0.8% 


19.3% 


23.8% 


1.6% 


52.7% 


1.8% 


100.0% 




Dom 





554 


53 


386 


11 


7 


1,011 




% of Total 


0.0% 


54.8% 


5.2% 


38.2% 


1.1% 


0.7% 


100.0% 


District 17A 


















Caswell 


Gen 


1 


6 


26 


19 


7 


5 


64 




Dom 





71 


11 


30 





10 


122 


Rockingham 


Gen 


2 


53 


124 


8 


455 


12 


654 




Dom 





459 


52 


215 


2 


44 


772 


District Totals 


Gen 


3 


59 


150 


27 


462 


17 


718 




% of Total 


0.4% 


8.2% 


20.9% 


3.8% 


64.3% 


2.4% 


100.0% 




Dom 





530 


63 


245 


2 


54 


894 




% of Total 


0.0% 


59.3% 


7.0% 


27.4% 


0.2% 


6.0% 


100.0% 


District 17B 


















Stokes 


Gen 


1 


12 


37 


7 


24 


4 


85 




Dom 


1 


101 


36 


76 


1 


15 


230 


Surry 


Gen 


3 


26 


61 


20 


117 


1 


228 




Dom 





289 


48 


214 


1 


3 


555 


District Totals 


Gen 


4 


38 


98 


27 


141 


5 


313 




% of Total 


1.3% 


12.1% 


31.3% 


8.6% 


45.0% 


1.6% 


100.0% 




Dom 


1 


390 


84 


290 


2 


18 


785 




% of Total 


0.1% 


49.7% 


10.7% 


36.9% 


0.3% 


2.3% 


100.0% 


District 18 


















Guilford 


Gen 


11 


431 


1,542 


351 


1,790 


343 


4,468 




% of Total 


0.2% 


9.6% 


34.5% 


7.9% 


40.1% 


7.7% 


100.0% 




Dom 


2 


2,968 


212 


203 


22 


86 


3,493 




% of Total 


0.1% 


85.0% 


6.1% 


5.8% 


0.6% 


2.5% 


100.0% 


DLstrlct 19A 


















Cabarrus 


Gen 


5 


48 


172 


131 


131 


7 


494 




Dom 





486 


61 


367 





16 


930 


Rowan 


Gen 


3 


79 


139 


58 


151 





430 




Dom 


2 


596 


51 


231 


5 


5 


890 


District Totals 


Gen 


8 


127 


311 


189 


282 


7 


924 




% of Total 


0.9% 


13.7% 


33.7% 


20.5% 


30.5% 


0.8% 


100.0% 




Dom 


2 


1,082 


112 


598 


5 


21 


1,820 




% of Total 


0.1% 


59.5% 


6.2% 


32.9% 


0.3% 


1.2% 


100.0% 



♦General civil cases and appeals and transfers from magistrates are identified as Gen, and domestic relations cases as Dom. 



192 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 



July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Judge's Final 
Order or 







Trial by 


Trial by 


Voluntary 


Judgment 






Total 






Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


Without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 


Disposed 


District 19B 


















Montgomery 


Gen 


1 


22 


100 


12 


76 





211 




Dom 





181 


13 


9 





2 


205 


Randolph 


Gen 


6 


55 


122 


21 


221 


25 


450 




Dom 





451 


39 


215 


7 


93 


805 


District Totals 


Gen 


7 


77 


222 


33 


297 


25 


661 




% of Total 


1.1% 


11.6% 


33.6% 


5.0% 


44.9% 


3.8% 


100.0% 




Dom 





632 


52 


224 


7 


95 


1,010 




% of Total 


0.0% 


62.6% 


5.1% 


22.2% 


0.7% 


9.4% 


100.0% 


District 20 


















Anson 


Gen 


3 


11 


31 


9 


21 


1 


76 




Dom 





118 


20 


94 


2 





234 


Moore 


Gen 


10 


90 


99 


17 


124 


1 


341 




Dom 


1 


314 


28 


72 








415 


Richmond 


Gen 


1 


30 


190 


22 


113 


4 


360 




Dom 





315 


23 


140 


10 


9 


497 


Stanly 


Gen 


1 


23 


45 


146 


8 


3 


226 




Dom 





213 


15 


129 





3 


360 


Union 


Gen 


16 


59 


139 


21 


138 


1 


374 




Dom 





451 


48 


167 


2 


9 


677 


District Totals 


Gen 


31 


213 


504 


215 


404 


10 


1,377 




% of Total 


2.3% 


15.5% 


36.6% 


15.6% 


29.3% 


0.7% 


100.0% 




Dom 


1 


1,411 


134 


602 


14 


21 


2,183 




% of Total 


0.0% 


64.6% 


6.1% 


27.6% 


0.6% 


1.0% 


100.0% 


District 21 


















Forsyth 


Gen 


12 


176 


998 


250 


1,165 


344 


2,945 




% of Total 


0.4% 


6.0% 


33.9% 


8.5% 


39.6% 


11.7% 


100.0% 




Dom 


3 


1,778 


337 


525 


7 


167 


2,817 




% of Total 


0.1% 


63.1% 


12.0% 


18.6% 


0.2% 


5.9% 


100.0% 


District 22 


















Alexander 


Gen 


2 


8 


25 


1 


44 


4 


84 




Dom 





99 


11 


80 





6 


196 


Davidson 


Gen 


6 


46 


170 


59 


241 


27 


549 




Dom 


1 


462 


57 


398 


8 


21 


947 


Davie 


Gen 


4 


47 


63 





20 


16 


150 




Dom 





151 


37 


16 





17 


221 


Iredell 


Gen 


8 


64 


155 


28 


302 


29 


586 




Dom 


1 


400 


83 


414 





43 


941 


District Totals 


Gen 


20 


165 


413 


88 


607 


76 


1,369 




% of Total 


1.5% 


12.1% 


30.2% 


6.4% 


44.3% 


5.6% 


100.0% 




Dom 


2 


1,112 


188 


908 


8 


87 


2,305 




% of Total 


0.1% 


48.2% 


8.2% 


39.4% 


0.3% 


3.8% 


100.0% 



♦General civil cases and appeals and transfers from magistrates are identified as Gen, and domestic relations cases as Dom. 



193 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Judge's Final 
Order or 







Trial by 


Trial by 


Voluntary 


Judgment 






Total 






Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


Without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 


Disposed 


District 23 


















Alleghany 


Gen 


2 


16 


19 


3 


10 


3 


53 




Dom 





57 


8 


20 


2 


5 


92 


Ashe 


Gen 


8 


11 


25 


4 


32 


2 


82 




Dom 


1 


142 


15 


38 





2 


198 


Wilkes 


Gen 


7 


HI 


130 


29 


378 


7 


662 




Dom 





366 


57 


162 


4 


9 


598 


Yadkin 


Gen 


1 


15 


44 


17 


36 





113 




Dom 





130 


18 


52 


1 


7 


208 


District Totals 


Gen 


18 


153 


218 


53 


456 


12 


910 




% of Total 


2.0% 


16.8% 


24.0% 


5.8% 


50.1% 


1.3% 


100.0% 




Dom 


1 


695 


98 


272 


7 


23 


1,096 




% of Total 


0.1% 


63.4% 


8.9% 


24.8% 


0.6% 


2.1% 


100.0% 


District 24 


















Avery 


Gen 


1 


11 


57 


10 


38 


7 


124 




Dom 





52 


19 


42 





4 


117 


Madison 


Gen 


1 


4 


15 


6 


4 


1 


31 




Dom 





74 


8 


46 





4 


132 


Mitchell 


Gen 


2 


8 


31 


13 


40 





94 




Dom 





60 


11 


36 





5 


112 


Watauga 


Gen 


2 


33 


111 


36 


90 


9 


281 




Dom 





134 


22 


61 





8 


225 


Yancey 


Gen 


1 


3 


7 


11 


9 


1 


32 




Dom 





86 


19 


38 





6 


149 


District Totals 


Gen 


7 


59 


221 


76 


181 


18 


562 




% of Total 


1.2% 


10.5% 


39.3% 


13.5% 


32.2% 


3.2% 


100.0% 




Dom 





406 


79 


223 





27 


735 




% of Total 


0.0% 


55.2% 


10.7% 


30.3% 


0.0% 


3.7% 


100.0% 


District 25 


















Burke 


Gen 


3 


45 


130 


48 


161 


41 


428 




Dom 





424 


68 


246 





36 


774 


Caldwell 


Gen 


5 


49 


178 


60 


197 


23 


512 




Dom 


1 


501 


47 


197 





30 


776 


Catawba 


Gen 


6 


49 


235 


134 


364 


86 


874 




Dom 


5 


832 


90 


571 


3 


81 


1,582 


District Totals 


Gen 


14 


143 


543 


242 


722 


150 


1,814 




% of Total 


0.8% 


7.9% 


29.9% 


13.3% 


39.8% 


8.3% 


100.0% 




Dom 


6 


1,757 


205 


1,014 


3 


147 


3,132 




% of Total 


0.2% 


56.1% 


6.5% 


32.4% 


0.1% 


4.7% 


100.0% 



♦General civil cases and appeals and transfers from magistrates are identified as Gen, and domestic relations cases as Dom. 



194 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 
July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Judge's Final 
Order or 







Trial by 


Trial by 


Voluntary 


Judgment 






Total 






Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


Without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 


Disposed 


District 26 


















Mecklenburg 


Gen 


40 


1,268 


2,667 


621 


3,280 


51 


7,927 




% of Total 


0.5% 


16.0% 


33.6% 


7.8% 


41.4% 


0.6% 


100.0% 




Dom 


7 


3,324 


425 


1,237 


21 


28 


5,042 




% of Total 


0.1% 


65.9% 


8.4% 


24.5% 


0.4% 


0.6% 


100.0% 


District 27A 


















Gaston 


Gen 


15 


73 


244 


86 


343 


32 


793 




% of Total 


1.9% 


9.2% 


30.8% 


10.8% 


43.3% 


4.0% 


100.0% 




Dom 


1 


1,421 


119 


686 





213 


2,440 




% of Total 


0.0% 


58.2% 


4.9% 


28.1% 


0.0% 


8.7% 


100.0% 


District 27B 


















Cleveland 


Gen 


10 


62 


125 


26 


177 


38 


438 




Dom 


1 


589 


68 


457 





108 


1,223 


Lincoln 


Gen 


3 


27 


63 


53 


82 


2 


230 




Dom 


1 


254 


38 


201 


1 


1 


496 


District Totals 


Gen 


13 


89 


188 


79 


259 


40 


668 




% of Total 


1.9% 


13.3% 


28.1% 


1 1 .8% 


38.8% 


6.0% 


100.0% 




Dom 


2 


843 


106 


658 


1 


109 


1,719 




% of Total 


0.1% 


49.0% 


6.2% 


38.3% 


0.1% 


6.3% 


100.0% 


District 28 


















Buncombe 


Gen 


18 


157 


442 


201 


518 


134 


1,470 




% of Total 


1.2% 


10.7% 


30.1% 


13.7% 


35.2% 


9.1% 


100.0% 




Dom 


2 


184 


199 


1,452 


27 


136 


2,000 




% of Total 


0.1% 


9.2% 


10.0% 


72.6% 


1.4% 


6.8% 


100.0% 


District 29 


















Henderson 


Gen 


4 


37 


123 


95 


108 


38 


405 




Dom 


1 


352 


25 


131 





14 


523 


McDowell 


Gen 


1 


17 


48 


8 


69 


27 


170 




Dom 





272 


24 


29 


1 


28 


354 


Polk 


Gen 





14 


16 


8 


3 


1 


42 




Dom 





37 


3 


14 





6 


60 


Rutherford 


Gen 


2 


34 


59 


34 


61 


17 


207 




Dom 





408 


26 


131 


2 


39 


606 


Transylvania 


Gen 


4 


21 


56 


34 


14 


19 


148 




Dom 


7 


124 


12 


44 





5 


192 


District Totals 


Gen 


11 


123 


302 


179 


255 


102 


972 




% of Total 


1.1% 


12.7% 


31.1% 


18.4% 


26.2% 


10.5% 


100.0% 




Dom 


8 


1,193 


90 


349 


3 


92 


1,735 




% of Total 


0.5% 


68.8% 


5.2% 


20.1% 


0.2% 


5.3% 


100.0% 



♦General civil cases and appeals and transfers from magistrates are identified as Gen, and domestic relations cases as Dom. 



195 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CIVIL (NON-MAGISTRATE) CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS* 
July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Judge's Final 
Order or 







Trial by 


Trial by 


Voluntary 


Judgment 






Total 






Jury 


Judge 


Dismissal 


Without Trial 


Clerk 


Other 


Disposed 


District 30 


















Cherokee 


Gen 





12 


26 


8 


47 


10 


103 




Dom 





88 


20 


44 





7 


159 


Clay 


Gen 





4 


10 


9 


14 


4 


41 




Dom 





15 


7 


28 


1 





51 


Graham 


Gen 


1 


5 


10 


5 


10 


3 


34 




Dom 


1 


43 


10 


9 


1 


3 


67 


Haywood 


Gen 


2 


38 


66 


15 


77 


12 


210 




Dom 


1 


305 


41 


90 





11 


448 


Jackson 


Gen 


2 


17 


62 


19 


51 


6 


157 




Dom 





54 


19 


118 


1 


18 


210 


Macon 


Gen 


3 


23 


47 


22 


26 


5 


126 




Dom 





80 


23 


93 





24 


220 


Swain 


Gen 


1 


4 


20 


4 


7 


1 


37 




Dom 


2 


55 


13 


26 





2 


98 


District Totals 


Gen 


9 


103 


241 


82 


232 


41 


708 




% of Total 


1.3% 


14.5% 


34.0% 


11.6% 


32.8% 


5.8% 


100.0% 




Dom 


4 


640 


133 


408 


3 


65 


1,253 




% of Total 


0.3% 


51.1% 


10.6% 


32.6% 


0.2% 


5.2% 


100.0% 


State Totals 


Gen 


426 


5,888 


17,427 


6,033 


21,248 


3,367 


54,389 




% of Total 


0.8% 


10.8% 


32.0% 


11.1% 


39.1% 


6.2% 


100.0% 




Dom 


79 


39,865 


5,264 


20,384 


321 


3,466 


69,379 




% of Total 


0.1% 


57.5% 


7.6% 


29.4% 


0.5% 


5.0% 


100.0% 



•General civil cases and appeals and transfers from magistrates are identified as Gen, and domestic relations cases as Dom. 



196 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES 
PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 





<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Pending 


Age (Days) Age (Daj 


District 1 




















Camden 


10 


52.6% 


2 


10.5% 


7 


36.8% 


19 


354.0 


158.0 


Chowan 


38 


69.1% 


4 


7.3% 


13 


23.6% 


55 


262.5 


113.0 


Currituck 


34 


56.7% 


14 


23.3% 


12 


20.0% 


60 


219.5 


146.0 


Dare 


67 


63.2% 


14 


13.2% 


25 


23.6% 


106 


221.0 


110.0 


Gates 


14 


70.0% 


2 


10.0% 


4 


20.0% 


20 


178.1 


84.0 


Pasquotank 


72 


52.6% 


26 


19.0% 


39 


28.5% 


137 


260.0 


158.0 


Perquimans 


29 


41.4% 


4 


5.7% 


37 


52.9% 


70 


587.8 


382.0 


District Totals 


264 


56.5% 


66 


14.1% 


137 


29.3% 


467 


295.7 


143.0 


District 2 




















Beaufort 


77 


37.9% 


36 


17.7% 


90 


44.3% 


203 


394.6 


297.0 


Hyde 


13 


52.0% 


5 


20.0% 


7 


28.0% 


25 


260.1 


147.0 


Martin 


59 


41.3% 


30 


21.0% 


54 


37.8% 


143 


431.2 


274.0 


Tyrrell 


6 


60.0% 


1 


10.0% 


3 


30.0% 


10 


237.8 


160.0 


Washington 


26 


66.7% 


3 


7.7% 


10 


25.6% 


39 


221.2 


73.0 


District Totals 


181 


43.1% 


75 


17.9% 


164 


39.0% 


420 


379.2 


257.0 


District 3 




















Carteret 


128 


68.8% 


40 


21.5% 


18 


9.7% 


186 


142.8 


97.5 


Craven 


235 


61.4% 


74 


19.3% 


74 


19.3% 


383 


195.3 


109.0 


Pamlico 


16 


57.1% 


7 


25.0% 


5 


17.9% 


28 


203.5 


149.0 


Pitt 


275 


78.1% 


58 


16.5% 


19 


5.4% 


352 


119.6 


71.0 


District Totals 


654 


68.9% 


179 


18.9% 


116 


12.2% 


949 


157.2 


94.0 


District 4 




















Duplin 


103 


70.5% 


29 


19.9% 


14 


9.6% 


146 


181.9 


108.5 


Jones 


15 


40.5% 


6 


16.2% 


16 


43.2% 


37 


392.2 


219.0 


Onslow 


476 


47.9% 


147 


14.8% 


370 


37.3% 


993 


334.4 


203.0 


Sampson 


101 


75.4% 


18 


13.4% 


15 


1 1 .2% 


134 


171.6 


70.5 


District Totals 


695 


53.1% 


200 


15.3% 


415 


31.7% 


1,310 


302.4 


161.0 


District 5 




















New Hanover 


319 


49.5% 


155 


24.1% 


170 


26.4% 


644 


249.5 


191.0 


Pender 


56 


59.6% 


21 


22.3% 


17 


18.1% 


94 


238.1 


118.5 


District Totals 


375 


50.8% 


176 


23.8% 


187 


25.3% 


738 


248.0 


169.0 


District 6 




















Bertie 


45 


71.4% 


14 


22.2% 


4 


6.3% 


63 


124.3 


79.0 


Halifax 


167 


62.1% 


72 


26.8% 


30 


11.2% 


269 


171.1 


130.0 


Hertford 


65 


60.7% 


26 


24.3% 


16 


15.0% 


107 


169.6 


71.0 


Northampton 


34 


58.6% 


8 


13.8% 


16 


27.6% 


58 


235.5 


105.0 


District Totals 


311 


62.6% 


120 


24.1% 


66 


13.3% 


497 


172.3 


107.0 



197 



District 7 

Edgecombe 

Nash 

Wilson 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES 
PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 



<6 



% 



146 73.0% 
187 60.7% 
137 74.9% 



6-12 

18 

50 
28 



% 

9.0% 
16.2% 
15.3% 



>12 



% 



36 18.0% 

71 23.1% 

18 9.8% 



Total Mean Median 

Pending Age (Days) Age (Days) 

200 223.7 65.0 

308 227.8 92.5 

183 138.9 66.0 



District Totals 



470 



68.0% 



% 



13.9% 



125 



18.1% 



691 



203.1 



77.0 



District 8 

Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 



1? 
135 
361 



56.5% 
50.9% 
59.1% 



S 

70 
154 



21.7% 
26.4% 
25.2% 



5 
60 
% 



21.7% 
22.6% 
15.7% 



23 
265 
611 



321.7 
258.2 
211.2 



137.0 
169.0 
127.0 



District Totals 



509 



56.6% 



229 



25.5% 



161 



17.9% 



899 



227.9 



142.0 



District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 



75 
56 
72 
80 
44 



69.4% 
57.7% 
69.2% 
55.9% 
63.8% 



21 
16 

24 
47 
15 



19.4% 
16.5% 
23.1% 
32.9% 
21.7% 



12 

25 

8 

16 
10 



11.1% 
25.8% 
7.7% 
11.2% 
14.5% 



108 

97 

104 

143 

69 



155.7 
242.5 
138.7 
183.1 
197.9 



82.5 
135.0 

81.0 
119.0 
100.0 



District Totals 



327 



62.8% 



123 



23.6% 



71 



13.6% 



521 



181.6 



102.0 



District 10 

Wake 



949 



25.6% 



493 



13.3% 2,272 



61.2% 



3,714 693.3 



532.0 



District 11 

Hamett 
Johnston 

Lee 



151 
204 

125 



62.4% 
64.2% 
61.0% 



52 
60 
46 



21.5% 
18.9% 

22.4% 



39 
54 

34 



16.1% 
17.0% 
16.6% 



242 
318 
205 



171.8 
173.7 
184.8 



105.5 
108.5 
114.0 



District Totals 



480 



62.7% 



158 



20.7% 



127 



16.6% 



765 



176.1 



109.0 



District 12 

Cumberland 



1,269 57.1% 



453 



20.4% 



502 



22.6% 



2,224 



225.1 



135.0 



District 13 

Bladen 

Brunswick 

Columbus 



36 
131 

158 



58.1% 
34.5% 
40.0% 



12 
65 

70 



19.4% 
17.1% 
17.7% 



14 
184 
167 



22.6% 
48.4% 
42.3% 



62 
380 
395 



243.5 
454.2 
435.6 



97.0 
338.0 
259.0 



District Totals 



325 



38.8% 



147 



17.6% 



365 



43.6% 



837 



429.8 



283.0 



DLstrlct 14 

Durham 



414 



31.0% 



249 



18.6% 



673 



50.4% 



1,336 464.2 



368.0 



DLstrlct ISA 

Alamance 



290 



67.3% 



60 



13.9% 



18.8% 



431 



179.3 



78.0 



198 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES 
PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 





<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Pending 


Age (Days) Age (Daj 


District 15B 




















Chatham 


68 


56.2% 


26 


21.5% 


27 


22.3% 


121 


206.6 


155.0 


Orange 


123 


44.9% 


81 


29.6% 


70 


25.5% 


274 


260.3 


221.0 


District Totals 


191 


48.4% 


107 


27.1% 


97 


24.6% 


395 


243.8 


192.0 


District 16A 




















Hoke 


48 


68.6% 


14 


20.0% 


8 


11.4% 


70 


204.5 


95.5 


Scotland 


80 


54.4% 


27 


18.4% 


40 


27.2% 


147 


252.9 


133.0 


District Totals 


128 


59.0% 


41 


18.9% 


48 


22.1% 


217 


237.3 


120.0 


District 16B 




















Robeson 


195 


45.8% 


82 


19.2% 


149 


35.0% 


426 


291.1 


220.5 


District 17A 




















Caswell 


33 


68.8% 


11 


22.9% 


4 


8.3% 


48 


170.7 


99.0 


Rockingham 


145 


63.3% 


58 


25.3% 


26 


11.4% 


229 


169.7 


88.0 


District Totals 


178 


64.3% 


69 


24.9% 


30 


10.8% 


277 


169.9 


91.0 


District 17B 




















Stokes 


51 


61.4% 


18 


21.7% 


14 


16.9% 


83 


198.0 


113.0 


Surry 


113 


55.9% 


26 


12.9% 


63 


31.2% 


202 


281.4 


113.5 


District Totals 


164 


57.5% 


44 


15.4% 


77 


27.0% 


285 


257.1 


113.0 


District 18 




















Guilford 


967 


33.2% 


432 


14.8% 


1,514 


52.0% 


2,913 


627.1 


389.0 


District 19A 




















Cabarrus 


184 


58.0% 


42 


13.2% 


91 


28.7% 


317 


233.0 


99.0 


Rowan 


232 


76.1% 


34 


11.1% 


39 


12.8% 


305 


142.5 


63.0 


District Totals 


416 


66.9% 


76 


12.2% 


130 


20.9% 


622 


188.6 


73.5 


District 19B 




















Montgomery 


66 


43.4% 


19 


12.5% 


67 


44.1% 


152 


496.7 


285.0 


Randolph 


192 


64.4% 


42 


14.1% 


64 


21.5% 


298 


226.4 


107.5 


District Totals 


258 


57.3% 


61 


13.6% 


131 


29.1% 


450 


317.7 


136.0 


District 20 




















Anson 


110 


50.2% 


20 


9.1% 


89 


40.6% 


219 


374.5 


178.0 


Moore 


120 


37.0% 


44 


13.6% 


160 


49.4% 


324 


507.6 


361.0 


Richmond 


143 


43.7% 


47 


14.4% 


137 


41.9% 


327 


365.2 


297.0 


Stanly 


77 


27.3% 


30 


10.6% 


175 


62.1% 


282 


878.5 


710.0 


Union 


146 


49.7% 


59 


20.1% 


89 


30.3% 


294 


301.2 


182.0 


District Totals 


596 


41.2% 


200 


13.8% 


650 


45.0% 


1,446 


485.6 


317.5 


District 21 




















Forsyth 


730 


62.7% 


201 


17.3% 


234 


20.1% 


1,165 


217.9 


99.0 



199 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES 
PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) Total Mean Median 





<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Pending 


Age (Days) Age (Da3 


District 22 




















Alexander 


28 


46.7% 


18 


30.0% 


14 


23.3% 


60 


241.8 


200.5 


Davidson 


243 


42.4% 


95 


16.6% 


235 


41.0% 


573 


366.6 


254.0 


Davie 


59 


93.7% 


2 


3.2% 


2 


3.2% 


63 


79.9 


37.0 


Iredell 


182 


56.9% 


84 


26.3% 


54 


16.9% 


320 


198.7 


145.5 


District Totals 


512 


50.4% 


199 


19.6% 


305 


30.0% 


1,016 


288.5 


173.5 


District 23 




















Alleghany 


28 


68.3% 


8 


19.5% 


5 


12.2% 


41 


153.3 


63.0 


Ashe 


29 


42.0% 


20 


29.0% 


20 


29.0% 


69 


298.9 


193.0 


Wilkes 


96 


79.3% 


18 


14.9% 


7 


5.8% 


121 


116.3 


67.0 


Yadkin 


61 


65.6% 


11 


11.8% 


21 


22.6% 


93 


247.0 


105.0 


District Totals 


214 


66.0% 


57 


17.6% 


53 


16.4% 


324 


197.4 


97.5 


District 24 




















Avery 


24 


35.8% 


13 


19.4% 


30 


44.8% 


67 


433.5 


297.0 


Madison 


34 


52.3% 


13 


20.0% 


18 


27.7% 


65 


259.5 


171.0 


Mitchell 


24 


42.1% 


13 


22.8% 


20 


35.1% 


57 


405.2 


225.0 


Watauga 


73 


56.6% 


30 


23.3% 


26 


20.2% 


129 


269.8 


149.0 


Yancey 


31 


73.8% 


5 


11.9% 


6 


14.3% 


42 


172.2 


88.0 


District Totals 


186 


51.7% 


74 


20.6% 


100 


27.8% 


360 


308.4 


170.5 


District 25 




















Burke 


188 


74.6% 


53 


21.0% 


11 


4.4% 


252 


128.7 


73.5 


Caldwell 


149 


62.1% 


51 


21.3% 


40 


16.7% 


240 


186.6 


112.0 


Catawba 


305 


67.5% 


99 


21.9% 


48 


10.6% 


452 


164.8 


100.0 


District Totals 


642 


68.0% 


203 


21.5% 


99 


10.5% 


944 


160.7 


93.0 


District 26 




















Mecklenburg 


1,548 


58.0% 


531 


19.9% 


589 


22.1% 


2,668 


238.7 


127.0 


District 27A 




















Gaston 


450 


56.2% 


172 


21.5% 


179 


22.3% 


801 


207.2 


134.0 


District 27B 




















Cleveland 


210 


89.7% 


18 


7.7% 


6 


2.6% 


234 


101.2 


52.0 


Lincoln 


66 


81.5% 


8 


9.9% 


7 


8.6% 


81 


226.8 


64.0 


District Totals 


276 


87.6% 


26 


8.3% 


13 


4.1% 


315 


133.5 


56.0 


District 28 




















Buncombe 


574 


59.9% 


180 


18.8% 


205 


21.4% 


959 


226.0 


126.0 



200 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES 
PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 





<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Pending 


Age (Days) Age (Da; 


District 29 




















Henderson 


135 


50.4% 


54 


20.1% 


79 


29.5% 


268 


314.1 


173.5 


McDowell 


76 


69.1% 


19 


17.3% 


15 


13.6% 


110 


159.8 


103.5 


Polk 


16 


66.7% 


3 


12.5% 


5 


20.8% 


24 


205.5 


82.0 


Rutherford 


91 


61.5% 


30 


20.3% 


27 


18.2% 


148 


187.2 


97.5 


Transylvania 


58 


46.4% 


21 


16.8% 


46 


36.8% 


125 


343.5 


219.0 


District Totals 


376 


55.7% 


127 


18.8% 


172 


25.5% 


675 


262.7 


133.0 


District 30 




















Cherokee 


39 


50.6% 


11 


14.3% 


27 


35.1% 


77 


420.1 


172.0 


Clay 


9 


69.2% 


2 


15.4% 


2 


15.4% 


13 


153.2 


53.0 


Graham 


13 


61.9% 


4 


19.0% 


4 


19.0% 


21 


218.5 


84.0 


Haywood 


100 


50.8% 


21 


10.7% 


76 


38.6% 


197 


342.8 


156.0 


Jackson 


48 


59.3% 


11 


13.6% 


22 


27.2% 


81 


366.9 


144.0 


Macon 


50 


58.1% 


16 


18.6% 


20 


23.3% 


86 


332.9 


128.5 


Swain 


20 


60.6% 


7 


21.2% 


6 


18.2% 


33 


208.0 


106.0 


District Totals 


279 


54.9% 


72 


14.2% 


157 


30.9% 


508 


337.9 


140.0 


State Totals 


16,393 


50.3% 


5,778 


17.7% 


10,394 


31.9% 


32,565 


346.5 


176.0 



201 



District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 



<6 

28 
141 

80 
161 

37 
223 

60 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES 
DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



% 

77.8% 
83.9% 
73.4% 
74.5% 
67.3% 
78.0% 
77.9% 



6-12 

5 
13 
22 
35 
11 
29 
12 



% 



>12 



% 



Total Mean Median 

Disposed Age (Days) Age (Days) 



13.9% 


3 


8.3% 


36 


111.7 


64.5 


7.7% 


14 


8.3% 


168 


111.0 


44.5 


20.2% 


7 


6.4% 


109 


151.9 


91.0 


16.2% 


20 


9.3% 


216 


143.6 


76.0 


20.0% 


7 


12.7% 


55 


168.3 


83.0 


10.1% 


34 


11.9% 


286 


159.0 


72.5 


15.6% 


5 


6.5% 


77 


183.0 


77.0 



District Totals 



730 



77.1% 



127 



13.4% 



90 



9.5% 



947 



146.9 



71.0 



District 2 




















Beaufort 


328 


81.8% 


24 


6.0% 


49 


12.2% 


401 


150.5 


46.0 


Hyde 


27 


67.5% 


9 


22.5% 


4 


10.0% 


40 


156.6 


71.0 


Martin 


203 


84.6% 


23 


9.6% 


14 


5.8% 


240 


93.4 


47.0 


Tyrrell 


15 


83.3% 


2 


11.1% 


1 


5.6% 


18 


88.3 


44.0 


Washington 


142 


77.2% 


31 


16.8% 


11 


6.0% 


184 


115.9 


48.0 


District Totals 


715 


81.0% 


89 


10.1% 


79 


8.9% 


883 


126.8 


47.0 


District 3 




















Carteret 


489 


80.6% 


90 


14.8% 


28 


4.6% 


607 


106.4 


57.0 


Craven 


794 


78.2% 


114 


11.2% 


107 


10.5% 


1,015 


126.0 


59.0 


Pamlico 


64 


78.0% 


11 


13.4% 


7 


8.5% 


82 


111.3 


42.5 


Pitt 


852 


84.2% 


105 


10.4% 


55 


5.4% 


1,012 


107.6 


61.5 


District Totals 


2,199 


81.0% 


320 


11.8% 


197 


7.3% 


2,716 


114.3 


59.0 


District 4 




















Duplin 


363 


82.3% 


38 


8.6% 


40 


9.1% 


441 


127.9 


56.0 


Jones 


64 


76.2% 


7 


8.3% 


13 


15.5% 


84 


219.2 


47.5 


Onslow 


1,476 


84.3% 


138 


7.9% 


137 


7.8% 


1,751 


126.6 


59.0 


Sampson 


515 


90.5% 


43 


7.6% 


11 


1.9% 


569 


70.6 


41.0 


District Totals 


2,418 


85.0% 


226 


7.9% 


201 


7.1% 


2,845 


118.3 


56.0 


District 5 




















New Hanover 


1,370 


78.4% 


157 


9.0% 


221 


12.6% 


1,748 


136.3 


54.0 


Pender 


198 


69.7% 


41 


14.4% 


45 


15.8% 


284 


187.6 


48.0 


District Totals 


1,568 


77.2% 


198 


9.7% 


266 


13.1% 


2,032 


143.5 


53.0 


District 6 




















Bertie 


242 


86.7% 


22 


7.9% 


15 


5.4% 


279 


78.9 


5.0 


Halifax 


601 


84.2% 


88 


12.3% 


25 


3.5% 


714 


89.2 


58.0 


Hertford 


236 


83.7% 


38 


13.5% 


8 


2.8% 


282 


87.4 


50.0 


Northampton 


108 


72.0% 


21 


14.0% 


21 


14.0% 


150 


145.7 


70.5 


District Totals 


1,187 


83.3% 


169 


1 1 .9% 


69 


4.8% 


1,425 


92.8 


50.0 



202 



District 7 

Edgecombe 

Nash 

Wilson 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES 

DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 
Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 - June 30, 1989 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



<6 

502 
863 
620 



% 

82.7% 
87.6% 
88.7% 



6-12 

62 
63 
52 



% 

10.2% 
6.4% 
7.4% 



>12 

43 
59 

27 



7.1% 
6.0% 
3.9% 



Total Mean Median 

Disposed Age (Days) Age (Days) 



607 
985 
699 



118.2 
93.9 
83.0 



48.0 
47.0 
49.0 



District Totals 1,985 



86.6% 



177 



7.7% 



129 



5.6% 



2,291 



97.0 



48.0 



District 8 
Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 



69 

482 
1,005 



85.2% 
75.1% 
76.1% 



8 

95 

155 



9.9% 
14.8% 
11.7% 



4 

65 

160 



4.9% 
10.1% 

12.1% 



81 

642 

1,320 



76.8 
134.7 
133.7 



9.0 
65.5 
59.0 



District Totals 1,556 



76.2% 



258 



12.6% 



229 



11.2% 



2,043 



131.8 



60.0 



District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 



247 
228 
248 
486 
148 



78.2% 
76.8% 
87.3% 
82.7% 
74.4% 



46 
47 
30 
65 
31 



14.6% 
15.8% 
10.6% 
11.1% 
15.6% 



23 
22 
6 
37 
20 



7.3% 
7.4% 
2.1% 
6.3% 
10.1% 



316 
297 
284 
588 
199 



126.0 
125.3 
76.8 
106.5 
130.5 



55.0 
57.0 
44.0 
46.0 
56.0 



District Totals 1,357 



80.6% 



219 



13.0% 



108 



6.4% 



1,684 



111.3 



49.0 



District 10 

Wake 



2,865 



81.5% 



181 



5.1% 



469 



13.3% 3,515 



216.5 



47.0 



District 11 

Harnett 

Johnston 

Lee 



604 
786 
443 



81.4% 
79.7% 
81.9% 



51 

48 
47 



6.9% 
4.9% 
8.7% 



87 

152 

51 



11.7% 

15.4% 

9.4% 



742 
986 
541 



114.6 

133.0 

96.6 



43.0 
48.0 
42.0 



District Totals 1,833 



80.8% 



146 



6.4% 



290 



12.8% 2,269 



118.3 



46.0 



District 12 

Cumberland 



3,782 



74.8% 



580 



11.5% 



692 



13.7% 5,054 



156.9 



67.0 



District 13 

Bladen 

Brunswick 

Columbus 



320 
368 
561 



86.7% 
75.3% 
75.1% 



22 
26 
49 



6.0% 
5.3% 
6.6% 



27 

95 

137 



7.3% 
19.4% 
18.3% 



369 
489 

747 



86.1 
279.7 
246.5 



12.0 
51.0 
55.0 



District Totals 1,249 



77.8% 



97 



6.0% 



259 



16.1% 



1,605 



219.8 



46.0 



District 14 

Durham 



1,436 



83.2% 



118 



6.8% 



171 



9.9% 



1,725 



144.5 



46.0 



District ISA 

Alamance 



1,039 



89.5% 



68 



5.9% 



54 



4.7% 



1,161 



90.1 



50.0 



203 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES 
DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 





<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Disposed 


Age (Days) Age (Da] 


District 15B 




















Chatham 


257 


83.7% 


20 


6.5% 


30 


9.8% 


307 


116.6 


43.0 


Orange 


472 


74.2% 


33 


5.2% 


131 


20.6% 


636 


187.4 


53.0 


District Totals 


729 


77.3% 


53 


5.6% 


161 


17.1% 


943 


164.4 


48.0 


District 16A 




















Hoke 


289 


78.1% 


27 


7.3% 


54 


14.6% 


370 


254.1 


37.0 


Scotland 


352 


87.8% 


19 


4.7% 


30 


7.5% 


401 


88.9 


35.0 


District Totals 


641 


83.1% 


46 


6.0% 


84 


10.9% 


771 


168.2 


36.0 


District 16B 




















Robeson 


939 


92.9% 


46 


4.5% 


26 


2.6% 


1,011 


57.0 


32.0 


District 17A 




















Caswell 


101 


82.8% 


10 


8.2% 


11 


9.0% 


122 


112.0 


41.0 


Rockingham 


645 


83.5% 


64 


8.3% 


63 


8.2% 


772 


106.2 


44.0 


District Totals 


746 


83.4% 


74 


8.3% 


74 


8.3% 


894 


107.0 


43.0 


District 17B 




















Stokes 


178 


77.4% 


21 


9.1% 


31 


13.5% 


230 


141.4 


56.0 


Surry 


527 


95.0% 


13 


2.3% 


15 


2.7% 


555 


61.3 


42.0 


District Totals 


705 


89.8% 


34 


4.3% 


46 


5.9% 


785 


84.8 


46.0 


District 18 




















Guilford 


3,084 


88.3% 


197 


5.6% 


212 


6.1% 


3,493 


98.4 


48.0 


District 19A 




















Cabarrus 


850 


91.4% 


43 


4.6% 


37 


4.0% 


930 


77.9 


43.0 


Rowan 


808 


90.8% 


58 


6.5% 


24 


2.7% 


890 


75.7 


46.0 


District Totals 


1,658 


91.1% 


101 


5.5% 


61 


3.4% 


1,820 


76.8 


44.0 


District 19B 




















Montgomery 


186 


90.7% 


12 


5.9% 


7 


3.4% 


205 


76.0 


47.0 


Randolph 


617 


76.6% 


100 


12.4% 


88 


10.9% 


805 


133.4 


55.0 


District Totals 


803 


79.5% 


112 


11.1% 


95 


9.4% 


1,010 


121.7 


54.0 


District 20 




















Anson 


204 


87.2% 


20 


8.5% 


10 


4.3% 


234 


81.6 


49.0 


Moore 


357 


86.0% 


31 


7.5% 


27 


6.5% 


415 


116.5 


57.0 


Richmond 


446 


89.7% 


33 


6.6% 


18 


3.6% 


497 


77.7 


47.0 


Stanly 


330 


91.7% 


17 


4.7% 


13 


3.6% 


360 


73.7 


40.0 


Union 


530 


78.3% 


65 


9.6% 


82 


12.1% 


677 


137.1 


46.0 


District Totals 


1,867 


85.5% 


166 


7.6% 


150 


6.9% 


2,183 


103.2 


47.0 


District 21 




















Forsyth 


2,189 


77.7% 


241 


8.6% 


387 


13.7% 


2,817 


159.6 


63.0 



204 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES 
DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 





<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Disposed 


Age (Days) Age (Da; 


District 22 




















Alexander 


170 


86.7% 


18 


9.2% 


8 


4.1% 


196 


74.7 


40.0 


Davidson 


758 


80.0% 


52 


5.5% 


137 


14.5% 


947 


158.6 


50.0 


Davie 


175 


79.2% 


41 


18.6% 


5 


2.3% 


221 


103.0 


50.0 


Iredell 


796 


84.6% 


63 


6.7% 


82 


8.7% 


941 


97.7 


41.0 


District Totals 


1,899 


82.4% 


174 


7.5% 


232 


10.1% 


2,305 


121.3 


44.0 


District 23 




















Alleghany 


86 


93.5% 


5 


5.4% 


1 


1.1% 


92 


60.4 


40.0 


Ashe 


175 


88.4% 


11 


5.6% 


12 


6.1% 


198 


88.6 


42.0 


Wilkes 


555 


92.8% 


31 


5.2% 


12 


2.0% 


598 


61.9 


36.5 


Yadkin 


165 


79.3% 


26 


12.5% 


17 


8.2% 


208 


127.2 


54.0 


District Totals 


981 


89.5% 


73 


6.7% 


42 


3.8% 


1,096 


79.0 


41.0 


District 24 




















Avery 


85 


72.6% 


17 


14.5% 


15 


12.8% 


117 


167.8 


72.0 


Madison 


106 


80.3% 


18 


13.6% 


8 


6.1% 


132 


103.5 


66.0 


Mitchell 


98 


87.5% 


9 


8.0% 


5 


4.5% 


112 


91.7 


61.5 


Watauga 


172 


76.4% 


35 


15.6% 


18 


8.0% 


225 


123.3 


69.0 


Yancey 


126 


84.6% 


16 


10.7% 


7 


4.7% 


149 


106.9 


61.0 


District Totals 


587 


79.9% 


95 


12.9% 


53 


7.2% 


735 


118.7 


66.0 


District 25 




















Burke 


583 


75.3% 


88 


11.4% 


103 


13.3% 


774 


126.7 


48.5 


Caldwell 


616 


79.4% 


93 


12.0% 


67 


8.6% 


776 


120.4 


47.0 


Catawba 


1,258 


79.5% 


160 


10.1% 


164 


10.4% 


1,582 


122.2 


51.0 


District Totals 


2,457 


78.4% 


341 


10.9% 


334 


10.7% 


3,132 


122.9 


49.0 


District 26 




















Mecklenburg 


3,932 


78.0% 


375 


7.4% 


735 


14.6% 


5,042 


176.1 


75.0 


District 27 A 




















Gaston 


2,026 


83.0% 


109 


4.5% 


305 


12.5% 


2,440 


126.0 


42.0 


District 27B 




















Cleveland 


1,094 


89.5% 


123 


10.1% 


6 


0.5% 


1,223 


66.0 


42.0 


Lincoln 


467 


94.2% 


23 


4.6% 


6 


1.2% 


496 


79.5 


42.0 


District Totals 


1,561 


90.8% 


146 


8.5% 


12 


0.7% 


1,719 


69.9 


42.0 


District 28 




















Buncombe 


1,593 


79.7% 


257 


12.9% 


150 


7.5% 


2,000 


123.6 


55.0 



205 



AGES OF DOMESTIC RELATIONS CASES 
DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 





<6 


% 


6-12 


% 


>12 


% 


Disposed 


Age (Days) Age (Da] 


District 29 




















Henderson 


463 


88.5% 


46 


8.8% 


14 


2.7% 


523 


83.7 


47.0 


McDowell 


277 


78.2% 


44 


12.4% 


33 


9.3% 


354 


125.6 


51.5 


Polk 


50 


83.3% 


4 


6.7% 


6 


10.0% 


60 


156.0 


45.0 


Rutherford 


501 


82.7% 


42 


6.9% 


63 


10.4% 


606 


120.3 


45.0 


Transylvania 


162 


84.4% 


12 


6.3% 


18 


9.4% 


192 


121.4 


47.0 


District Totals 


1,453 


83.7% 


148 


8.5% 


134 


7.7% 


1,735 


111.7 


48.0 


District 30 




















Cherokee 


121 


76.1% 


23 


14.5% 


15 


9.4% 


159 


135.9 


57.0 


Clay 


40 


78.4% 


5 


9.8% 


6 


11.8% 


51 


154.4 


92.0 


Graham 


54 


80.6% 


9 


13.4% 


4 


6.0% 


67 


122.9 


69.0 


Haywood 


350 


78.1% 


65 


14.5% 


33 


7.4% 


448 


127.3 


56.0 


Jackson 


163 


77.6% 


34 


16.2% 


13 


6.2% 


210 


109.0 


51.0 


Macon 


163 


74.1% 


27 


12.3% 


30 


13.6% 


220 


162.4 


61.0 


Swain 


68 


69.4% 


19 


19.4% 


11 


11.2% 


98 


157.2 


68.5 


District Totals 


959 


76.5% 


182 


14.5% 


112 


8.9% 


1,253 


134.7 


59.0 


State Totals 


56,728 


81.8% 


5,943 


8.6% 


6,708 


9.7% 


69,379 


130.9 


52.0 



206 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 







Ageso 


f Pendin 


I Cases (Mc 


inths) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 




<9 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 1 




















Camden 


3 


27.3% 


3 


27.3% 


5 


45.5% 


11 


672.9 


438.0 


Chowan 


29 


56.9% 


10 


19.6% 


12 


23.5% 


51 


497.6 


221.0 


Currituck 


31 


42.5% 


18 


24.7% 


24 


32.9% 


73 


438.9 


401.0 


Dare 


144 


74.2% 


28 


14.4% 


22 


1 1 .3% 


194 


202.7 


100.5 


Gates 


14 


73.7% 


4 


21.1% 


1 


5.3% 


19 


171.1 


123.0 


Pasquotank 


57 


54.3% 


39 


37.1% 


9 


8.6% 


105 


259.7 


240.0 


Perquimans 


15 


39.5% 


14 


36.8% 


9 


23.7% 


38 


464.2 


352.5 


District Totals 


293 


59.7% 


116 


23.6% 


82 


16.7% 


491 


310.2 


190.0 


District 2 




















Beaufort 


72 


50.3% 


31 


21.7% 


40 


28.0% 


143 


402.2 


266.0 


Hyde 


8 


57.1% 


3 


21.4% 


3 


21.4% 


14 


400.6 


223.5 


Martin 


31 


57.4% 


7 


13.0% 


16 


29.6% 


54 


464.4 


144.0 


Tyrrell 


3 


75.0% 


1 


25.0% 





0.0% 


4 


207.3 


184.0 


Washington 


20 


76.9% 


3 


11.5% 


3 


11.5% 


26 


200.4 


121.5 


District Totals 


134 


55.6% 


45 


18.7% 


62 


25.7% 


241 


391.0 


214.0 


District 3 




















Carteret 


123 


83.1% 


18 


12.2% 


7 


4.7% 


148 


147.5 


95.5 


Craven 


197 


85.7% 


17 


7.4% 


16 


7.0% 


230 


143.1 


80.5 


Pamlico 


10 


83.3% 


2 


16.7% 





0.0% 


12 


130.4 


55.5 


Pitt 


242 


93.4% 


15 


5.8% 


2 


0.8% 


259 


108.3 


79.0 


District Totals 


572 


88.1% 


52 


8.0% 


25 


3.9% 


649 


130.0 


81.0 


District 4 




















Duplin 


90 


72.6% 


16 


12.9% 


18 


14.5% 


124 


253.8 


117.5 


Jones 


7 


28.0% 


5 


20.0% 


13 


52.0% 


25 


934.4 


631.0 


Onslow 


357 


46.4% 


190 


24.7% 


222 


28.9% 


769 


407.1 


297.0 


Sampson 


72 


80.9% 


10 


11.2% 


7 


7.9% 


89 


182.5 


81.0 


District Totals 


526 


52.2% 


221 


21.9% 


260 


25.8% 


1,007 


381.4 


249.0 


District 5 




















New Hanover 


679 


59.8% 


268 


23.6% 


189 


16.6% 


1,136 


279.0 


205.0 


Pender 


76 


58.0% 


41 


31.3% 


14 


10.7% 


131 


263.1 


214.0 


District Totals 


755 


59.6% 


309 


24.4% 


203 


16.0% 


1,267 


277.4 


206.0 


District 6 




















Bertie 


50 


84.7% 


5 


8.5% 


4 


6.8% 


59 


149.5 


58.0 


Halifax 


72 


78.3% 


16 


17.4% 


4 


4.3% 


92 


168.1 


83.0 


Hertford 


38 


74.5% 


9 


17.6% 


4 


7.8% 


51 


182.8 


112.0 


Northampton 


39 


79.6% 


8 


16.3% 


2 


4.1% 


49 


131.8 


49.0 


District Totals 


199 


79.3% 


38 


15.1% 


14 


5.6% 


251 


159.6 


73.0 



207 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) Total Mean Median 





<9 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


Pending 


Age (Days) Age (Da} 


District 7 




















Edgecombe 


114 


67.9% 


39 


23.2% 


15 


8.9% 


168 


204.1 


117.0 


Nash 


244 


70.7% 


72 


20.9% 


29 


8.4% 


345 


223.9 


156.0 


Wilson 


186 


67.9% 


57 


20.8% 


31 


11.3% 


274 


253.4 


159.5 


District Totals 


544 


69.1% 


168 


21.3% 


75 


9.5% 


787 


229.9 


148.0 


District 8 




















Greene 


33 


80.5% 


5 


12.2% 


3 


7.3% 


41 


177.5 


94.0 


Lenoir 


202 


79.5% 


38 


15.0% 


14 


5.5% 


254 


183.4 


110.5 


Wayne 


416 


75.0% 


107 


19.3% 


32 


5.8% 


555 


200.4 


143.0 


District Totals 


651 


76.6% 


150 


17.6% 


49 


5.8% 


850 


194.2 


128.0 


District 9 




















Franklin 


108 


85.7% 


13 


10.3% 


5 


4.0% 


126 


152.2 


125.0 


Granville 


55 


79.7% 


14 


20.3% 





0.0% 


69 


154.3 


121.0 


Person 


81 


85.3% 


13 


13.7% 


1 


1.1% 


95 


147.5 


116.0 


Vance 


124 


71.3% 


38 


21.8% 


12 


6.9% 


174 


210.5 


135.0 


Warren 


41 


68.3% 


13 


21.7% 


6 


10.0% 


60 


233.8 


159.5 


District Totals 


409 


78.1% 


91 


17.4% 


24 


4.6% 


524 


180.3 


129.0 


District 10 




















Wake 


2,705 


56.2% 


1,041 


21.6% 


1,070 


22.2% 


4,816 


347.0 


225.0 


District 11 




















Harnett 


332 


77.0% 


94 


21.8% 


5 


1.2% 


431 


162.2 


134.0 


Johnston 


260 


68.1% 


105 


27.5% 


17 


4.5% 


382 


204.9 


173.5 


Lee 


245 


80.9% 


54 


17.8% 


4 


1.3% 


303 


139.2 


71.0 


District Totals 


837 


75.0% 


253 


22.7% 


26 


2.3% 


1,116 


170.6 


127.0 


District 12 




















Cumberland 


550 


71.8% 


150 


19.6% 


66 


8.6% 


766 


202.0 


109.0 


District 13 




















Bladen 


71 


65.1% 


27 


24.8% 


11 


10.1% 


109 


222.5 


149.0 


Brunswick 


198 


37.3% 


130 


24.5% 


203 


38.2% 


531 


528.5 


431.0 


Columbus 


179 


43.6% 


112 


27.3% 


120 


29.2% 


411 


408.2 


330.0 


District Totals 


448 


42.6% 


269 


25.6% 


334 


31.8% 


1,051 


449.7 


345.0 


District 14 




















Durham 


874 


75.1% 


129 


11.1% 


161 


13.8% 


1,164 


219.6 


106.0 


District 15 A 




















Alamance 


330 


58.7% 


161 


28.6% 


71 


12.6% 


562 


254.7 


191.5 



208 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 

Ages of Pending Cases (Months) 





<9 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


Pending 


Age (Days) Age (Daj 


District 15B 




















Chatham 


66 


68.0% 


29 


29.9% 


2 


2.1% 


97 


193.0 


133.0 


Orange 


213 


71.2% 


67 


22.4% 


19 


6.4% 


299 


213.1 


147.0 


District Totals 


279 


70.5% 


96 


24.2% 


21 


5.3% 


396 


208.1 


147.0 


District 16A 




















Hoke 


50 


90.9% 


4 


7.3% 


1 


1.8% 


55 


133.0 


112.0 


Scotland 


102 


68.9% 


27 


18.2% 


19 


12.8% 


148 


239.5 


115.0 


District Totals 


152 


74.9% 


31 


15.3% 


20 


9.9% 


203 


210.7 


115.0 


District 16B 




















Robeson 


218 


46.7% 


127 


27.2% 


122 


26.1% 


467 


363.7 


315.0 


District 17A 




















Caswell 


22 


66.7% 


10 


30.3% 


1 


3.0% 


33 


202.4 


140.0 


Rockingham 


279 


86.6% 


40 


12.4% 


3 


0.9% 


322 


150.5 


114.0 


District Totals 


301 


84.8% 


50 


14.1% 


4 


1.1% 


355 


155.3 


114.0 


District 17B 




















Stokes 


49 


71.0% 


14 


20.3% 


6 


8.7% 


69 


218.4 


164.0 


Surry 


99 


63.5% 


42 


26.9% 


15 


9.6% 


156 


245.5 


159.5 


District Totals 


148 


65.8% 


56 


24.9% 


21 


9.3% 


225 


237.2 


161.0 


District 18 




















Guilford 


1,956 


46.5% 


1,019 


24.2% 


1,230 


29.3% 


4,205 


414.9 


317.0 


District 19A 




















Cabarrus 


307 


60.3% 


137 


26.9% 


65 


12.8% 


509 


242.3 


171.0 


Rowan 


342 


69.1% 


146 


29.5% 


7 


1.4% 


495 


194.2 


158.0 


District Totals 


649 


64.6% 


283 


28.2% 


72 


7.2% 


1,004 


218.6 


160.0 


District 19B 




















Montgomery 


102 


49.3% 


33 


15.9% 


72 


34.8% 


207 


515.8 


288.0 


Randolph 


138 


72.6% 


43 


22.6% 


9 


4.7% 


190 


188.0 


120.0 


District Totals 


240 


60.5% 


76 


19.1% 


81 


20.4% 


397 


358.9 


154.0 


District 20 




















Anson 


49 


34.5% 


42 


29.6% 


51 


35.9% 


142 


552.7 


394.0 


Moore 


162 


30.2% 


84 


15.7% 


290 


54.1% 


536 


774.2 


704.5 


Richmond 


174 


58.0% 


73 


24.3% 


53 


17.7% 


300 


309.7 


228.0 


Stanly 


127 


29.7% 


38 


8.9% 


263 


61.4% 


428 


1,078.5 


795.0 


Union 


224 


47.1% 


117 


24.6% 


135 


28.4% 


476 


365.1 


296.0 


District Totals 


736 


39.1% 


354 


18.8% 


792 


42.1% 


1,882 


649.2 


394.0 


District 21 




















Forsyth 


1,005 


66.8% 


326 


21.7% 


174 


11.6% 


1,505 


247.9 


148.0 



209 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 







Ages 


of Pending Cases (Months) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age (Days) 


Median 




<9 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 22 




















Alexander 


28 


90.3% 


3 


9.7% 





0.0% 


31 


155.9 


163.0 


Davidson 


251 


59.8% 


92 


21.9% 


77 


18.3% 


420 


265.4 


151.5 


Davie 


56 


77.8% 


14 


19.4% 


2 


2.8% 


72 


170.9 


115.0 


I rede 11 


257 


70.6% 


91 


25.0% 


16 


4.4% 


364 


203.4 


154.0 


District Totals 


592 


66.7% 


200 


22.5% 


95 


10.7% 


887 


228.5 


149.0 


District 23 




















Alleghany 


16 


69.6% 


5 


21.7% 


2 


8.7% 


23 


229.2 


177.0 


Ashe 


42 


77.8% 


9 


16.7% 


3 


5.6% 


54 


164.6 


92.5 


Wilkes 


296 


93.4% 


15 


4.7% 


6 


1.9% 


317 


107.9 


79.0 


Yadkin 


51 


54.8% 


21 


22.6% 


21 


22.6% 


93 


597.9 


249.0 


District Totals 


405 


83.2% 


50 


10.3% 


32 


6.6% 


487 


213.5 


101.0 


District 24 




















Avery 


53 


88.3% 


3 


5.0% 


4 


6.7% 


60 


175.3 


90.0 


Madison 


10 


62.5% 


3 


18.8% 


3 


18.8% 


16 


251.3 


133.5 


Mitchell 


45 


84.9% 


7 


13.2% 


1 


1.9% 


53 


136.9 


107.0 


Watauga 


125 


83.9% 


22 


14.8% 


2 


1.3% 


149 


154.7 


128.0 


Yancey 


17 


58.6% 


2 


6.9% 


10 


34.5% 


29 


356.1 


175.0 


District Totals 


250 


81.4% 


37 


12.1% 


20 


6.5% 


307 


179.7 


120.0 


District 25 




















Burke 


184 


83.3% 


30 


13.6% 


7 


3.2% 


221 


144.5 


91.0 


Caldwell 


225 


76.3% 


60 


20.3% 


10 


3.4% 


295 


174.9 


120.0 


Catawba 


332 


87.6% 


38 


10.0% 


9 


2.4% 


379 


136.4 


81.0 


District Totals 


741 


82.8% 


128 


14.3% 


26 


2.9% 


895 


151.1 


95.0 


District 26 




















Mecklenburg 


4,067 


64.9% 


1,837 


29.3% 


359 


5.7% 


6,263 


220.6 


171.0 


District 27A 




















Gaston 


383 


75.5% 


106 


20.9% 


18 


3.6% 


507 


168.0 


105.0 


District 27B 




















Cleveland 


128 


94.8% 


7 


5.2% 





0.0% 


135 


84.2 


50.0 


Lincoln 


80 


94.1% 


5 


5.9% 





0.0% 


85 


76.1 


49.0 


District Totals 


208 


94.5% 


12 


5.5% 





0.0% 


220 


81.1 


50.0 


District 28 




















Buncombe 


601 


85.2% 


77 


10.9% 


27 


3.8% 


705 


148.4 


95.0 



210 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 







Ages 


of Pendin 


g Cases (M 


onths) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 

Age (Days) 


Median 




<9 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


Age (Days) 


District 29 




















Henderson 


198 


71.2% 


36 


12.9% 


44 


15.8% 


278 


254.8 


102.0 


McDowell 


43 


81.1% 


8 


15.1% 


2 


3.8% 


53 


151.0 


95.0 


Polk 


20 


74.1% 


6 


22.2% 


1 


3.7% 


27 


204.0 


162.0 


Rutherford 


90 


89.1% 


6 


5.9% 


5 


5.0% 


101 


148.9 


122.0 


Transylvania 


38 


66.7% 


8 


14.0% 


11 


19.3% 


57 


283.6 


164.0 


District Totals 


389 


75.4% 


64 


12.4% 


63 


12.2% 


516 


223.9 


107.5 


District 30 




















Cherokee 


45 


95.7% 


2 


4.3% 





0.0% 


47 


99.2 


85.0 


Clay 


19 


90.5% 


2 


9.5% 





0.0% 


21 


80.8 


46.0 


Graham 


11 


64.7% 


2 


1 1 .8% 


4 


23.5% 


17 


319.5 


123.0 


Haywood 


143 


68.8% 


25 


12.0% 


40 


19.2% 


208 


308.9 


150.0 


Jackson 


80 


89.9% 


8 


9.0% 


1 


1.1% 


89 


92.4 


42.0 


Macon 


48 


54.5% 


16 


18.2% 


24 


27.3% 


88 


394.4 


214.5 


Swain 


17 


85.0% 


2 


10.0% 


1 


5.0% 


20 


171.5 


112.5 


District Totals 


363 


74.1% 


57 


11.6% 


70 


14.3% 


490 


249.8 


112.5 


State Totals 


23,510 


62.8% 


8,179 


21.8% 


5,769 


15.4% 


37,458 


290.0 


170.0 



211 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) Total Mean Median 





<9 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


Disposed 


Age (Days) Age (Daj 


District 1 




















Camden 


10 


76.9% 


1 


7.7% 


2 


15.4% 


13 


267.7 


197.0 


Chowan 


42 


64.6% 


12 


18.5% 


11 


16.9% 


65 


261.8 


166.0 


Currituck 


51 


85.0% 


5 


8.3% 


4 


6.7% 


60 


154.6 


76.5 


Dare 


169 


67.9% 


44 


17.7% 


36 


14.5% 


249 


241.0 


110.0 


Gates 


14 


70.0% 


4 


20.0% 


2 


10.0% 


20 


265.2 


113.5 


Pasquotank 


81 


56.3% 


14 


9.7% 


49 


34.0% 


144 


349.7 


148.5 


Perquimans 


29 


70.7% 


6 


14.6% 


6 


14.6% 


41 


262.3 


134.0 


District Totals 


396 


66.9% 


86 


14.5% 


110 


18.6% 


592 


263.8 


113.0 


District 2 




















Beaufort 


112 


73.2% 


18 


11.8% 


23 


15.0% 


153 


242.0 


118.0 


Hyde 


9 


64.3% 


2 


14.3% 


3 


21.4% 


14 


311.1 


189.0 


Martin 


48 


92.3% 


2 


3.8% 


2 


3.8% 


52 


113.4 


72.0 


Tyrrell 


11 


68.8% 


4 


25.0% 


1 


6.3% 


16 


222.7 


88.0 


Washington 


48 


82.8% 


8 


13.8% 


2 


3.4% 


58 


179.2 


89.5 


District Totals 


228 


77.8% 


34 


1 1 .6% 


31 


10.6% 


293 


209.0 


98.0 


District 3 




















Carteret 


351 


86.0% 


48 


1 1 .8% 


9 


2.2% 


408 


154.1 


119.0 


Craven 


647 


87.8% 


81 


1 1 .0% 


9 


1.2% 


737 


129.6 


85.0 


Pamlico 


28 


90.3% 


3 


9.7% 





0.0% 


31 


117.5 


93.0 


Pitt 


717 


84.7% 


122 


14.4% 


8 


0.9% 


847 


149.1 


119.0 


District Totals 


1,743 


86.2% 


254 


12.6% 


26 


1.3% 


2,023 


142.5 


108.0 


District 4 




















Duplin 


107 


72.8% 


26 


17.7% 


14 


9.5% 


147 


224.7 


112.0 


Jones 


20 


47.6% 


9 


21.4% 


13 


31.0% 


42 


423.6 


288.0 


Onslow 


496 


80.1% 


63 


10.2% 


60 


9.7% 


619 


209.7 


94.0 


Sampson 


343 


87.9% 


26 


6.7% 


21 


5.4% 


390 


151.4 


77.5 


District Totals 


966 


80.6% 


124 


10.4% 


108 


9.0% 


1,198 


200.1 


91.0 


District 5 




















New Hanover 


1,235 


74.7% 


216 


13.1% 


203 


12.3% 


1,654 


217.8 


104.0 


Pender 


130 


67.4% 


46 


23.8% 


17 


8.8% 


193 


255.3 


160.0 


District Totals 


1,365 


73.9% 


262 


14.2% 


220 


1 1 .9% 


1,847 


221.7 


110.0 


District 6 




















Bertie 


69 


86.3% 


8 


10.0% 


3 


3.8% 


80 


142.5 


71.0 


Halifax 


169 


85.4% 


23 


11.6% 


6 


3.0% 


198 


148.5 


90.0 


Hertford 


122 


85.9% 


18 


12.7% 


2 


1.4% 


142 


139.0 


93.0 


Northampton 


57 


79.2% 


10 


13.9% 


5 


6.9% 


72 


177.5 


83.0 


District Totals 


417 


84.8% 


59 


12.0% 


16 


3.3% 


492 


149.0 


87.5 



212 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 



District 7 

Edgecombe 

Nash 

Wilson 



<9 

242 
538 
355 



Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



% 

78.1% 
88.2% 
83.7% 



9-18 

42 
60 
50 



% 

13.5% 

9.8% 

1 1 .8% 



>18 

26 
12 

19 



% 

8.4% 
2.0% 
4.5% 



Total Mean Median 

Disposed Age (Days) Age (Days) 



310 
610 

424 



202.6 
133.6 
157.9 



108.0 
81.0 
82.5 



District Totals 1,135 



84.4% 



152 



11.3% 



57 



4.2% 



1,344 



157.2 



86.5 



District 8 

Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 



70 
378 
520 



84.3% 
74.6% 
59.0% 



11 
107 
301 



13.3% 
21.1% 
34.2% 



2 
22 
60 



2.4% 
4.3% 
6.8% 



83 
507 
881 



137.6 
165.1 
230.3 



64.0 

76.0 

148.0 



District Totals 



968 



65.8% 



419 28.5% 



84 



5.7% 



1,471 



202.6 



111.0 



District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 



191 
125 
106 
175 
60 



85.3% 
82.2% 
77.4% 
74.8% 
70.6% 



17 
23 
25 
49 
17 



7.6% 
15.1% 
18.2% 
20.9% 
20.0% 



16 
4 
6 

10 



7.1% 
2.6% 
4.4% 
4.3% 
9.4% 



224 
152 
137 
234 
85 



207.5 
168.0 
198.7 
183.6 
224.6 



110.0 
119.5 
113.0 
118.5 
157.0 



District Totals 



657 



79.0% 



131 



15.7% 



44 



5.3% 



832 



193.9 



117.5 



District 10 

Wake 



4,637 74.7% 



860 



13.9% 



708 



1 1 .4% 6,205 



224.1 



107.0 



District 11 

Harnett 

Johnston 

Lee 



444 
535 
465 



72.9% 
66.3% 
80.7% 



146 
226 
104 



24.0% 
28.0% 
18.1% 



19 
46 

7 



3.1% 
5.7% 
1.2% 



609 

807 
576 



179.0 
216.8 
139.5 



105.0 

126.0 

70.5 



District Totals 1,444 72.5% 



476 23.9% 



72 



3.6% 



1,992 



182.9 



103.0 



District 12 

Cumberland 



1,305 



76.3% 



212 12.4% 



194 



11.3% 



1,711 



204.1 



105.0 



District 13 

Bladen 

Brunswick 

Columbus 



229 
264 
276 



75.6% 
49.6% 
51.4% 



27 
44 
46 



8.9% 
8.3% 
8.6% 



47 
224 
215 



15.5% 
42.1% 
40.0% 



303 

532 
537 



228.5 
637.6 
502.2 



66.0 

275.0 
251.0 



District Totals 



769 56.0% 



117 



8.5% 



486 



35.4% 1,372 



494.3 



175.0 



District 14 

Durham 



1,508 



71.8% 



165 



7.9% 



426 



20.3% 2,099 



285.8 



141.0 



District 15 A 

Alamance 



492 



77.5% 



71 



11.2% 



72 



11.3% 



635 



196.2 



93.0 



213 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 
Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) 



District 15B 

Chatham 
Orange 


<9 

85 
316 


% 

78.7% 
48.8% 


9-18 

19 
112 


% 

17.6% 
17.3% 


>18 

4 
219 


% 

3.7% 
33.8% 


Disposed 

108 
647 


Age (Days) Age (Daj 

173.0 99.5 
406.7 322.0 


District Totals 


401 


53.1% 


131 


17.4% 


223 


29.5% 


755 


373.3 


238.0 


District 16A 

Hoke 
Scotland 


89 
146 


73.6% 
78.1% 


9 
20 


7.4% 
10.7% 


23 
21 


19.0% 
11.2% 


121 
187 


412.7 
202.1 


102.0 
62.0 


District Totals 


235 


76.3% 


29 


9.4% 


44 


14.3% 


308 


284.8 


82.5 


District 16B 

Robeson 


525 


84.5% 


64 


10.3% 


32 


5.2% 


621 


135.3 


55.0 


District 17A 

Caswell 
Rockingham 


51 
471 


79.7% 
72.0% 


12 
181 


18.8% 
27.7% 


1 
2 


1.6% 
0.3% 


64 
654 


174.2 
155.1 


162.5 
70.0 


District Totals 


522 


72.7% 


193 


26.9% 


3 


0.4% 


718 


156.8 


74.5 


District 17B 

Stokes 
Surry 


56 
207 


65.9% 
90.8% 


23 
18 


27.1% 
7.9% 


6 

3 


7.1% 
1.3% 


85 
228 


221.1 
109.9 


181.0 
61.5 


District Totals 


263 


84.0% 


41 


13.1% 


9 


2.9% 


313 


140.1 


75.0 


District 18 

Guilford 


2,953 


66.1% 


484 


10.8% 


1,031 


23.1% 


4,468 


327.8 


119.0 


District 19A 

Cabarrus 
Rowan 


369 
340 


74.7% 
79.1% 


53 
79 


10.7% 
18.4% 


72 
11 


14.6% 
2.6% 


494 
430 


212.1 
179.7 


90.0 
146.5 


District Totals 


709 


76.7% 


132 


14.3% 


83 


9.0% 


924 


197.0 


113.0 


District 19B 

Montgomery 
Randolph 


146 
358 


69.2% 
79.6% 


21 
83 


10.0% 
18.4% 


44 
9 


20.9% 
2.0% 


211 
450 


303.6 
142.8 


120.0 
71.5 


District Totals 


504 


76.2% 


104 


15.7% 


53 


8.0% 


661 


194.2 


86.0 


District 20 

Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 


50 
244 
271 
193 
246 


65.8% 
71.6% 
75.3% 
85.4% 
65.8% 


12 
34 
63 
16 
59 


15.8% 
10.0% 
17.5% 
7.1% 
15.8% 


14 
63 
26 
17 
69 


18.4% 

18.5% 

7.2% 

7.5% 

18.4% 


76 
341 
360 
226 
374 


308.2 
305.3 
187.9 
151.9 
258.6 


136.0 
107.0 
116.0 
63.0 
126.5 


District Totals 


1,004 


72.9% 


184 


13.4% 


189 


13.7% 


1,377 


236.9 


105.0 


District 21 

Forsyth 


1,946 


66.1% 


572 


19.4% 


427 


14.5% 


2,945 


249.7 


133.0 



214 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Ages of Disposed Cases (Months) Total Mean Median 





<9 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


Disposed 


Age (Days) Age (Da 


District 22 




















Alexander 


74 


88.1% 


10 


11.9% 





0.0% 


84 


133.4 


87.5 


Davidson 


430 


78.3% 


57 


10.4% 


62 


1 1 .3% 


549 


178.8 


78.0 


Davie 


110 


73.3% 


31 


20.7% 


9 


6.0% 


150 


209.9 


146.0 


Iredell 


449 


76.6% 


111 


18.9% 


26 


4.4% 


586 


170.6 


82.0 


District Totals 


1,063 


77.6% 


209 


15.3% 


97 


7.1% 


1,369 


175.9 


86.0 


District 23 




















Alleghany 


41 


77.4% 


9 


17.0% 


3 


5.7% 


53 


196.1 


144.0 


Ashe 


62 


75.6% 


14 


17.1% 


6 


7.3% 


82 


193.7 


126.5 


Wilkes 


592 


89.4% 


52 


7.9% 


18 


2.7% 


662 


122.3 


66.0 


Yadkin 


88 


77.9% 


20 


17.7% 


5 


4.4% 


113 


205.4 


100.0 


District Totals 


783 


86.0% 


95 


10.4% 


32 


3.5% 


910 


143.3 


72.0 


District 24 




















Avery 


84 


67.7% 


35 


28.2% 


5 


4.0% 


124 


216.7 


195.0 


Madison 


22 


71.0% 


5 


16.1% 


4 


12.9% 


31 


246.4 


169.0 


Mitchell 


86 


91.5% 


8 


8.5% 





0.0% 


94 


115.9 


83.0 


Watauga 


251 


89.3% 


26 


9.3% 


4 


1.4% 


281 


132.7 


88.0 


Yancey 


24 


75.0% 


6 


18.8% 


2 


6.3% 


32 


161.0 


80.0 


District Totals 


467 


83.1% 


80 


14.2% 


15 


2.7% 


562 


156.3 


97.5 


District 25 




















Burke 


351 


82.0% 


59 


13.8% 


18 


4.2% 


428 


164.7 


112.5 


Caldwell 


376 


73.4% 


98 


19.1% 


38 


7.4% 


512 


188.3 


97.0 


Catawba 


764 


87.4% 


88 


10.1% 


22 


2.5% 


874 


147.0 


105.5 



District Totals 1,491 82.2% 245 13.5% 78 4.3% 1,814 162.9 104.0 

District 26 

Mecklenburg 5,289 66.7% 1,739 21.9% 899 11.3% 7,927 235.3 141.0 



District 27A 










Gaston 


591 


74.5% 


172 


21.7% 


District 27B 










Cleveland 


426 


97.3% 


12 


2.7% 


Lincoln 


225 


97.8% 


4 


1.7% 


District Totals 


651 


97.5% 


16 


2.4% 


District 28 











30 3.8% 793 169.4 



Buncombe 



1,213 



82.5% 



226 



15.4% 



31 



0.0% 
0.4% 

0.1% 



2.1< 



438 
230 

668 



1,470 



116.4 
92.4 

108.1 



160.3 



94.0 



105.0 
75.0 

89.5 



124.0 



215 



AGES OF GENERAL CIVIL AND MAGISTRATE APPEAL/TRANSFER CASES 

DISPOSED IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 





Ages of Cases Disposed July 


1,1988 


-- June 30, 1989 








Ages 


of Disposed Cases (Months) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 

Age (Days) 


Median 




<9 


% 


9-18 


% 


>18 


% 


Age (Day; 


District 29 




















Henderson 


336 


83.0% 


38 


9.4% 


31 


7.7% 


405 


186.5 


115.0 


McDowell 


142 


83.5% 


15 


8.8% 


13 


7.6% 


170 


171.3 


124.0 


Polk 


38 


90.5% 


3 


7.1% 


1 


2.4% 


42 


119.2 


91.5 


Rutherford 


175 


84.5% 


19 


9.2% 


13 


6.3% 


207 


172.1 


117.0 


Transylvania 


105 


70.9% 


20 


13.5% 


23 


15.5% 


148 


253.2 


150.0 


District Totals 


796 


81.9% 


95 


9.8% 


81 


8.3% 


972 


188.0 


122.0 


District 30 




















Cherokee 


93 


90.3% 


7 


6.8% 


3 


2.9% 


103 


111.5 


64.0 


Clay 


35 


85.4% 


5 


12.2% 


1 


2.4% 


41 


147.2 


90.0 


Graham 


23 


67.6% 


8 


23.5% 


3 


8.8% 


34 


233.1 


157.5 


Haywood 


163 


77.6% 


40 


19.0% 


7 


3.3% 


210 


188.2 


136.5 


Jackson 


139 


88.5% 


16 


10.2% 


2 


1.3% 


157 


141.5 


117.0 


Macon 


88 


69.8% 


20 


15.9% 


18 


14.3% 


126 


225.4 


132.5 


Swain 


28 


75.7% 


8 


21.6% 


1 


2.7% 


37 


197.4 


154.0 


District Totals 


569 


80.4% 


104 


14.7% 


35 


4.9% 


708 


173.6 


116.5 


State Totals 


40,005 


73.6% 


8,337 


15.3% 


6,047 


11.1% 


54,389 


224.7 


112.0 



216 



CIVIL MAGISTRATE FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS IN THE 

DISTRICT COURTS 
July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Filings Dispositions 



Filings Dispositions 



District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 

District Totals 

District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 

District Totals 

District 3 

Carteret 
Craven 
Pamlico 
Pitt 



86 
616 
241 
700 
267 
1,180 
265 

3,355 



1,696 
118 

1,052 
125 

531 

3,522 



1,668 

2,566 

251 

3,875 



87 
541 
228 
725 
279 
1,175 
286 

3,321 



1,646 
118 

1,015 
129 

473 

3,381 



1,800 

2,486 

279 

3,924 



District 7 

Edgecombe 

Nash 

Wilson 

District Totals 

DLstriet 8 
Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 

District Totals 

District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 

District Totals 

District 10 

Wake 



7,914 
6,483 
5,542 

19,939 



411 
2,420 
3,907 

6,738 



1,277 
1,869 
1,117 
4,307 
1,531 

10,101 



19,506 



8,140 
6,272 
5,352 

19,764 



406 
2,361 
3,839 

6,606 



1,349 
1,822 
923 
4,057 
1,465 

9,616 



19,080 



District Totals 

District 4 

Duplin 
Jones 
Onslow 
Sampson 

District Totals 



8,360 



1,927 

192 

5,289 

1,771 

9,179 



8,489 



1,975 

190 

5,328 

1,486 

8,979 



District 11 

Harnett 

Johnston 

Lee 

District Totals 

District 12 

Cumberland 



2,277 
2,703 
1,421 

6,401 



14,430 



2,287 
2,748 
1,447 

6,482 



14,269 



District 5 

New Hanover 
Pender 

District Totals 

District 6 

Bertie 
Halifax 
Hertford 
Northampton 

District Totals 



6,935 
734 

7,669 



873 

2,086 

796 

878 

4,633 



6,810 
695 

7,505 



858 

1,987 

763 

868 

4,476 



District 13 

Bladen 

Brunswick 

Columbus 

District Totals 

District 14 

Durham 

District 15 A 

Alamance 



2,478 
1,312 
1,547 

5,337 



19,551 



3,471 



2,515 
1,013 
1,580 

5,108 



19,293 



3,348 



217 



CIVIL MAGISTRATE FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS IN THE 

DISTRICT COURTS 
July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 





Filings 


Dispositions 




Filings 


Dispositions 


District 15B 






District 21 






Chatham 


857 


905 


Forsyth 


19,971 


19,879 


Orange 


2,029 


2,031 


District 22 






District Totals 


2,886 


2,936 


Alexander 


644 


674 








Davidson 


3,589 


3,326 








Davie 


550 


456 








Iredell 


3,804 


3,857 


District 16A 












Hoke 


875 


875 


District Totals 


8,587 


8,313 


Scotland 


1,758 


1,658 


District 23 






District Totals 


2,633 


2,533 


Alleghany 


192 


168 








Ashe 


340 


272 


District 16B 






Wilkes 


2,437 


2,339 


Robeson 


4,941 


4,848 


Yadkin 


556 


540 


District 17A 






District Totals 


3,525 


3,319 


Caswell 


424 


472 








Rockingham 


3,579 


3,572 


District 24 












Avery 


242 


253 


District Totals 


4,003 


4,044 


Madison 


187 


155 








Mitchell 


340 


308 


District 17B 






Watauga 


754 


745 


Stokes 


656 


663 


Yancey 


191 


165 


Surry 


2,133 


2,268 














District Totals 


1,714 


1,626 


District Totals 


2,789 


2,931 


District 25 






District 18 






Burke 


2,526 


2,562 


Guilford 


20,743 


19,569 


Caldwell 


1,959 


1,941 








Catawba 


3,603 


3,484 


District 19A 












Cabarrus 


2,925 


2,507 


District Totals 


8,088 


7,987 


Rowan 


3,568 


3,444 


District 26 






District Totals 


6,493 


5,951 


Mecklenburg 


40,928 


40,165 


District 19B 






District 27A 






Montgomery 


1,253 


1,182 


Gaston 


6,391 


6,229 


Randolph 


2,235 


2,128 














District Totals 


6,391 


6,229 


District Totals 


3,488 


3,310 


District 27B 






District 20 






Cleveland 


4,759 


4,836 


Anson 


1,190 


1,156 


Lincoln 


1,513 


1,438 


Moore 


1,754 


1,756 








Richmond 


1,785 


864 


District Totals 


6,272 


6,274 


Stanly 


1,103 


1,084 








Union 


3,316 


3,366 


District 28 












Buncombe 


5,139 


5,174 


District Totals 


9,148 


8,226 









218 



CIVIL MAGISTRATE FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS IN THE 

DISTRICT COURTS 



District 29 

Henderson 

McDowell 

Polk 

Rutherford 

Transylvania 

District Totals 



Filings 

1,530 

878 

211 
2,471 

517 

5,607 



July 1, 1988 - 


- June 30, 1989 


Dispositions 






District 30 


1,483 


Cherokee 


841 


Clay 


198 


Graham 


2,394 


Haywood 


557 


Jackson 




Macon 


5,473 


Swain 




District Totals 




State Totals 



Filings 


Dispositions 


355 


339 


148 


141 


137 


120 


1,009 


956 


356 


314 


389 


410 


97 


72 



2,491 



308,029 



2,352 



300,856 



219 



District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 



MATTERS ALLEGED IN JUVENILE PETITIONS 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 



OFFENSES 



CONDITIONS 



Delinquent 



Undisciplined 



Children 
Parental Before 

Other Misde-"" Rights Grand Court for 

Capital Felony meaner Total Truancy Other Total Dependent Neglected Abused Petitions Total First Time 



2 

16 
11 

29 
7 

82 
3 



2 
25 
12 
31 

8 
90 

4 



4 


3 


2 


1 


12 


3 


2 


2 








29 


17 





5 


1 





18 


18 





3 


1 





39 


39 


4 


4 








17 


8 


5 


11 


6 


5 


117 


61 





23 


1 


4 


33 


31 



District Totals 



22 



150 



172 



15 



51 



11 



10 



265 



177 



District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 



86 

2 

11 

1 
19 



101 

7 

45 

2 

23 



187 
9 

56 

3 
42 



18 
7 
6 


1 



8 








230 


105 


8 


2 





26 


11 


5 


1 


4 


73 


37 











3 


3 


3 








46 


12 



District Totals 



119 



178 



297 



32 



34 



378 



168 



District 3 

Carteret 
Craven 
Pamlico 
Pitt 



42 

23 

3 

81 



89 

125 

7 

182 



131 

148 

10 

263 



5 
11 

1 
4 



5 
12 

1 
7 



2 
14 

3 
42 



22 

12 

2 

31 



8 

10 
5 

7 



8 
11 

1 
17 



176 

207 

22 

367 



70 
105 

19 
146 



District Totals 



149 



403 



552 



21 



25 



61 



67 



30 



37 



772 



340 



District 4 

Duplin 
Jones 
Onslow 
Sampson 



District Totals 1 



32 



115 

30 

177 



38 

5 

255 

35 

333 



70 

5 

371 

65 

511 





7 

22 

8 

37 



21 
4 

57 
7 

89 



4 

1 

42 

4 

51 



7 


103 


44 


2 


19 


17 


8 


500 


198 


7 


92 


48 



24 



714 



307 



District 5 

New Hanover 
Pender 



District Totals 1 



180 
37 

217 



471 

41 

512 



652 

78 

730 



71 
11 

82 



71 
11 

82 



6 


59 


3 


16 


807 


265 


1 


4 


1 


4 


99 


48 



63 



20 



906 



313 



District 6 

Bertie 
Halifax 
Hertford 
Northampton 



District Totals 



3 

110 
16 

16 

145 



21 
129 

33 
17 

200 



24 

239 

49 

33 

345 



1 
3 

12 





8 

1 
3 

12 



1 


5 





4 


34 


24 


1 


21 


3 





272 


98 


1 


8 


3 





62 


36 





5 


1 


2 


44 


27 



39 



412 



185 



220 



MATTERS ALLEGED IN JUVENILE PETITIONS 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 











OFFENSES 








CONDITIONS 






Children 






Delinquent 




Undisciplined 








Parental 
Rights 


Grand 


Before 






Other 


Misde- 










Court for 


Capital Felony 


meanor 


Total 


Truancy 


Other 


Total 


Dependent Neglected 


Abused 


Petitions 


Total 


First Time 


District 7 




























Edgecombe 





81 


219 


300 


3 


6 


9 


21 


53 


13 


4 


400 


189 


Nash 





124 


177 


301 


2 


1 


3 


12 


28 


6 


5 


355 


165 


Wilson 





97 


149 


246 





4 


4 


10 


13 


8 


6 


287 


108 


District Totals 





302 


545 


847 


5 


11 


16 


43 


94 


27 


15 


1,042 


462 


District 8 




























Greene 








4 


4 


1 


1 


2 





8 








14 


30 


Lenoir 





27 


31 


58 





11 


11 


19 


37 


9 


6 


140 


122 


Wayne 





78 


83 


161 


6 


15 


21 


45 


% 


11 


40 


374 


141 


District Totals 





105 


118 


223 


7 


27 


34 


64 


141 


20 


46 


528 


293 


District 9 




























Franklin 





17 


22 


39 


5 


11 


16 


2 


10 


4 





71 


50 


Granville 





49 


59 


108 


3 


10 


13 


5 


7 


4 


2 


139 


61 


Person 





11 


28 


39 


4 


4 


8 


6 


6 


5 


2 


66 


41 


Vance 





51 


50 


101 


3 


14 


17 


3 


6 


6 





133 


68 


Warren 





29 


10 


39 


3 


1 


4 


2 


2 


2 





49 


24 


District Totals 





157 


169 


326 


18 


40 


58 


18 


31 


21 


4 


458 


244 


District 10 




























Wake 


1 


276 


685 


962 


16 


53 


69 


24 


31 


21 


39 


1,146 


446 


District 11 




























Harnett 





61 


184 


245 


2 


8 


10 


3 


15 


6 


6 


285 


87 


Johnston 





59 


98 


157 


7 


6 


13 


1 


13 


6 


5 


195 


82 


Lee 





32 


52 


84 


2 


1 


3 





17 


1 


10 


115 


69 


District Totals 





152 


334 


486 


11 


15 


26 


4 


45 


13 


21 


595 


238 


District 12 




























Cumberland 





413 


895 


1,308 


6 


411 


417 


211 


183 


56 


19 


2,194 


639 


District 13 




























Bladen 





32 


65 


97 


2 


4 


6 


4 


9 


1 


3 


120 


44 


Brunswick 





71 


51 


122 


1 


10 


11 


3 


12 


6 


5 


159 


78 


Columbus 





15 


39 


54 


1 


3 


4 


5 


29 


5 


4 


101 


85 


District Totals 





118 


155 


273 


4 


17 


21 


12 


50 


12 


12 


380 


207 


District 14 




























Durham 





156 


163 


319 


3 


47 


50 


65 


50 


12 


13 


509 


178 


District 15A 




























Alamance 





84 


267 


351 


3 


41 


44 


28 


32 


13 


10 


478 


172 



221 



MATTERS ALLEGED IN JUVENILE PETITIONS 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 







OFFE 


NSES CONDITIONS 




Children 




Delinquent 




Undisciplined Parental 


Grand 


Before 




Other Misde- 




Rights 


Court for 




Capital Felony meanor 


Total 


Truancy Other Total Dependent Neglected Abused Petitions 


Total 


First Time 


District 15B 












Chatham 


1 36 18 


55 


1 2 3 21 21 10 2 


112 


45 


Orange 


79 95 


174 


1 9 10 10 17 4 9 


224 


226 



District Totals 1 



115 



113 229 



11 13 



31 



38 14 



11 



336 



271 



District 16A 




























Hoke 





29 


50 


79 


4 


1 


5 


2 


6 


1 


3 


% 


56 


Scotland 





88 


97 


185 


2 





2 





55 


13 


2 


257 


132 



District Totals 



117 



147 



264 



61 



14 



353 



188 



District 16B 




























Robeson 





231 


357 


588 


1 


21 


22 


40 


40 


32 


10 


732 


245 


District 17A 




























Caswell 





15 


39 


54 





6 


6 


3 


4 


1 


2 


70 


29 


Rockingham 





190 


185 


375 


3 


27 


30 


19 


28 


16 


7 


475 


110 



District Totals 



205 



224 



429 



33 



36 



22 



32 



17 



545 



139 



District 17B 




























Stokes 


1 


58 


107 


166 





20 


20 


18 


27 


3 


2 


236 


65 


Surry 





75 


63 


138 


4 


10 


14 





14 


3 


6 


175 


74 



District Totals 1 



133 



170 



304 



30 



34 



18 



41 



411 



139 



District 18 

Guilford 





365 


709 


1,074 


77 


176 


253 


79 


136 


45 


70 


1,657 


615 


District 19A 

Cabarrus 
Rowan 






38 
119 


154 
204 


192 
323 


9 

38 


25 
60 


34 
98 


11 
115 


33 
% 


7 
40 


11 

12 


288 
684 


113 
193 


District Totals 





157 


358 


515 


47 


85 


132 


126 


129 


47 


23 


972 


306 


District 19B 

Montgomery 
Randolph 






14 
61 


11 
201 


25 
262 


2 
18 


5 
89 


7 
107 


1 
29 


10 
48 


5 

17 



13 


48 
476 


35 
206 



District Totals 



75 



212 



287 



20 



94 114 



30 



58 



22 



13 



524 



241 



District 20 

Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 

District Totals 



3 


32 


35 





1 


1 


4 


6 


1 





47 


37 


26 


54 


80 





14 


14 


6 


27 


25 


11 


163 


52 


54 


91 


145 


1 


12 


13 


11 


10 


5 


8 


192 


66 


15 


6H 


83 


7 


5 


12 


17 


17 


16 


3 


148 


70 


66 


105 


171 





4 


4 


37 


49 


26 


5 


292 


121 



164 



350 



514 



36 



44 



75 



109 



73 



27 



842 



346 



222 



MATTERS ALLEGED IN JUVENILE PETITIONS 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 











OFFENSES 






( 


CONDITI 


ONS 






Children 






Delinquent 




Undisciplined 








Parental 
Rights 


Grand 


Before 






Other 


Misde- 










Court for 


Capital Felony 


meanor 


Total 


Truancy 


Other 


Total 


Dependent Neglected 


Abused 


Petitions 


Total 


First Time 


District 21 




























Forsyth 





282 


418 


700 


3 


155 


158 


73 


112 


21 


29 


1,093 


471 


District 22 




























Alexander 





6 


16 


22 


2 


7 


9 


7 


12 


9 


1 


60 


53 


Davidson 





71 


114 


185 


3 


50 


53 


21 


29 


6 


16 


310 


205 


Davie 





5 


48 


53 





6 


6 


2 


1 


1 


4 


67 


39 


Iredell 





224 


213 


437 


31 


100 


131 


7 


41 


10 


18 


644 


198 


District Totals 





306 


391 


697 


36 


163 


199 


37 


83 


26 


39 


1,081 


495 


District 23 




























Alleghany 





14 


27 


41 


4 


6 


10 


1 


10 


6 


1 


69 


27 


Ashe 





19 


49 


68 


8 


6 


14 





3 


1 





86 


20 


Wilkes 


1 


41 


104 


146 


59 


30 


89 


40 


67 


35 


18 


395 


97 


Yadkin 





58 


125 


183 


12 


24 


36 


6 


38 


5 


2 


270 


72 


District Totals 


1 


132 


305 


438 


83 


66 


149 


47 


118 


47 


21 


820 


216 


District 24 




























Avery 





19 


21 


40 


29 


10 


39 





1 





2 


82 


45 


Madison 





6 


19 


25 


16 


4 


20 


9 


8 


4 


3 


69 


40 


Mitchell 





3 


16 


19 


2 


14 


16 


4 





1 


4 


44. 


22 


Watauga 





9 


35 


44 





30 


30 


5 


1 


1 


12 


93 


47 


Yancey 





1 


15 


16 


5 


5 


10 


9 


4 








39 


18 


District Totals 





38 


106 


144 


52 


63 


115 


27 


14 


6 


21 


327 


172 


District 25 




























Burke 





34 


36 


70 


7 


80 


87 


20 


47 


33 


9 


266 


138 


Caldwell 





121 





121 


29 


86 


115 


43 


43 


11 


8 


341 


143 


Catawba 





136 


206 


342 


19 


58 


77 


10 


25 


16 


11 


481 


172 


District Totals 





291 


242 


533 


55 


224 


279 


73 


115 


60 


28 


1,088 


453 


District 26 




























Mecklenburg 





483 


1,270 


1,753 


52 


391 


443 


34 


172 


45 


92 


2,539 


1,111 


District 27A 




























Gaston 





329 


369 


698 


17 


283 


300 


30 


54 


10 


10 


1,102 


349 


District 27B 




























Cleveland 





66 


119 


185 


15 


17 


32 


11 


54 


14 


8 


304 


185 


Lincoln 





33 


41 


74 


4 


11 


15 


3 


13 


2 


5 


112 


72 


District Totals 





99 


160 


259 


19 


28 


47 


14 


67 


16 


13 


416 


257 


District 28 




























Buncombe 





83 


205 


288 


43 


214 


257 


66 


64 


23 


3 


701 


317 



223 



MATTERS ALLEGED IN JUVENILE PETITIONS 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 











OFFENSES 








CONDITIONS 






Children 






Delinquent 




Undisciplined 








Parental 
Rights 


Grand 


Before 






Other 


Misde- 










Court for 




Capital Felony 


meanor 


Total 


Truancy 


Other 


Total 


Dependent Neglected 


Abused 


Petitions 


Total 


First Time 


District 29 




























Henderson 





2 


31 


33 


26 


15 


41 


4 


25 


4 


26 


133 


127 


McDowell 





40 


52 


101 


18 


25 


43 


22 


10 


6 


4 


186 


80 


Polk 





1 


1 


2 


8 


1 


9 


2 





1 


1 


15 


14 


Rutherford 





28 


76 


104 


56 


44 


100 


41 


111 


8 


8 


372 


114 


Transylvania 





8 


12 


20 


1 


11 


12 


6 


11 


7 


7 


63 


36 


District Total: 


; 


88 


172 


260 


109 


% 


205 


75 


157 


26 


46 


769 


371 


District 30 




























Cherokee 





14 


14 


28 


10 


13 


23 


23 


15 





5 


94 


58 


Clay 





1 


3 


4 





1 


1 


6 


2 


1 





14 


14 


Graham 





1 


9 


10 


5 


6 


11 


2 


4 





2 


29 


29 


Haywood 





17 


9 


26 


14 


46 


60 


8 


16 


10 





120 


66 


Jackson 





7 


2 


9 


8 


13 


21 


4 


10 


1 


4 


49 


46 


Macon 





9 


8 


17 


2 


5 


7 


12 


4 





2 


42 


41 


Swain 








1 


1 


2 


5 


7 


2 


4 





3 


17 


17 



District Totals 49 46 95 41 89 130 57 55 12 

State Totals 6 6,334 11,431 17,771 762 3,045 3,807 1,580 2,655 863 



16 



365 



271 



774 27,450 11,342 



224 



_ e 



O r- v~i Os r- oo r- 



.— . 


On 


in 


m 


oo 


r- 




oo 




>/-) 


CM 











c«"> O cn — i 

N 00 N h 



—■ m 



C/3 

w 

H 
H 

s 



c/3 
H 



3S 
00 
OS 






y 

2 



a* 
C 

3 
•-5 



as 

o 

^ ,- 
S & 1 

8 5 

o 

y 

S 
5 

Q 
< 



3 
1-9 



S 



3 



o o o o o c-> o 



O O CM O O 



O O O O O •«* W1 



<-" O O O © c-i © 



— o — — 



O O O o © — < m 



CI CM m c«1 tt © Os 



© © © © © CM ~ 



CM CI O O T ■» o 



o o o ci o o o 



o o o — — o o 



cm cm © cm cm r-- 
cm 



o o o o o 



~* — ' o o o 



© © ~ © © -h 



© -h — © CI 



CI SO 



— o — o o 



cm so r- o o 



CM © © © © 



— o o o o — 



2 g 



O O O — i 



so ON —i ^ 



cm so O c-> •-■ 



o ■* 

CM 



CO T © i-l 



Ifl » -H n 



CM 1/1 © ON 



so so cs © 



m so o -<t 



TT Tt O — 



5 £ 



SO —i © T 
CM 00 — I -«3- 

cm — cm 



« 



CM O O O 



CM O ■* i-H 



</l i/-i </-> c-> 

■■H VN 



r~ o tt o —i 



— CM OS 

■<»■ — i r- 



-h O O CM 



On 
CO 



—i o o o — 



-h CM O — 



M 
3 



u 



«j O" vT 

m <* *- 

O a. a. 



3 














3 












3 


o 














o 












o 


f- 












c 
3 


H 












H 




CM 












o 












I 

s 




3 
CO 




C 

2 


1 


00 
CO 


CJ 

s 

S 


2 

J2 




c 
> 

CO 


3 
1 

CO 

a. 




s 

Q 




S 


£0 


I 


H 




a 


U 





£ 













2 










o 










H 


Tf 












a 


o 


o 

8. 


s 


J2 


a. u 

a •£. 


6 


£ 

CO 


Q 



225 



_ e 
3 ~~ 



— r~ 



s 



m - ki it 

i-« M ^ ^ 


V-> 


— VO 


rO 


Csl 


m m 


r- 


(N — 


>9 


o ro 


OJ 



o 



vO Ov © 

00 •"-! 

— c-1 



^ _ -* ~H V© 



IT. 

X 

H 
- 
< 



- 



M 5 » 

g^ U r^ 

C H g 

Ex. U 3 

k s ? 

z 5 g§ 

25- 

S w - 

* H a 

> Z "» 

c 
- 
< 

— 

— . 



2 



"2 



o o o o 



o o e> o o 



o o o -<r 



— O <N O 



O « N N 



CI TT © © 



m — oo <n 



O O — ' — ' 



N t If) — 



o — o — 



o ts — i •-< o 



O O (N <n — i 



Tt O O 



© «N © 



N rt M -< N -- 



ts cs >/-> in o 



O — i — 



V, oo 



— O O O — > 



O 00 CN CI 



O O — O ~ 



•$ CI -h — 

o\ vo — r- 



<N VO oo © 

— i vn — i o~> 



c> — i fi 



Ifl h VO Ifl -h 



vo tc >/-> © cm 



VO 
O 



<N vn vo 

o> ■» on 
^ cs ^ 



£ 



i-H fT] 



£ 



3 

g 

o 

S 

M 

(5 



■c 
u 

a 



a 

2 

a. 

■p B 

« t a 

a o 2 

S3 | € 

00 o o 

I i z 



o 

H 

S 

s 


-1 


5 


2 u .c 

Q 2 z 



3 

o 
H 



o — 



a 

o 
H 



ja £ S « 
o a j £ 



I i 1 

•age,: 
5 £ o & > £ 



8 



3 
g 

S 

5 



226 



-3 00 



3 



» m ^ 
r^ fi — 
>r> -h —4 



Os 



oo n n 
(N On O 
•-> -h W) 



O 



O O O 



TT Tt O 



O — — I 



u 

OS 






o 
Z 

1 

OS 

e 



£ 



173 






t« 


i 


O 


O O ci 


c-> 


X 








s 














CO 

5 


.a 

Q 








H 






X 










< 






1 


■o 

01 


(N 


Tf r+ 


oo 


£ 






< 


c 
3 




ts 


CM 


W 








Ol 

at 








J 
























■o 










C/3 


o 




i 

a 

.52 
Q 


O 


ci — © 


T 


i 


§ 


00 

OS 


Ol 








as 


O 

u 


o 


X 

i 


■o 

01 


<N 


oo Tt O 


tN 


O 


H 


4> 


t 


c 

a 

Ol 


{N 


so 


» 


fe 


U 


3 


z 









tt Q S 
^ W - 

^ z ^ 

O 
H 
< 
U 

Q 
P 

s 

< 



£ a 



<■<■> O 00 — 



Ol 


E 




X 


JS 




■n 


Q 




o> 






J 






"3. 


•a 

01 




1 


e 


SO 


■5 


a 


(N 


s 


Ol 




3 


OS 





ON 
00 



o 



oo 




vn 


fN 


3 


^H 




^-, 




On 


TT 


ro 


SO 




so 




» 




,_ 


*t 


w-) 


oo 




~— 


r- 


ro 




>/-> 




■t 




ci 


o> 




<N 




^r 




t 


u-i 


Os 


tr 




to 






09 

3 




oo 








CN 


SO 

3 








<N 








to 

3 


o 


pm 








e2 


r< 


•o 

1 


m 




■*■< 




e2 


■* 




< 




03 






O 


>-« 


« 












« 
















8 

< 


i— I 








s 


s 


a 
X 


a 
2 

o 

— » 


3 


o 

S 

5 


•n 


c 

a 
6 


5 

S 


B 
| 


I 

C 

2 

OQ 


3 

6 

o 




•fi 

Q 


35 
C 

Q 


e 

i 

3 

Q 


C 
Q 


T5 

L. 

S 


Chatham 
Orange 


£ 

S 



227 



I "5 



co cm m 

5 m 



O CO 
CM CM 
CM — 



Ov 


o t 


"« 


O On 


o 


r- >n 


CM 


co O 


m 


cm r- 


O 


^H ^H 



— i ^ CM 



X 

r- 
H 
< 

j 
z ^ 

;> PS ac 

s 8 * 

jj U w 

C H g 

fa U a 

°S 2 7 

z 5 gg 

5 5^ 
<a- 

££ 

H 

< 



< 



2 



O — H 



— I -H CM 



O — l — I 



M H CM 



o — i — 



a 



CM O 
CM CO 



CM 'J 



O 0\ 
CM 






CM 



— . © — ' 



•>r r- — c 



o — — 



2 



= o — — 



E 
2 

Q 


O <7> 
CM Tt 


a- 










1 

c 


co CM 


If) 





* SI £ 



o 


CM 


CO </-> 


M3 


CM 
CO 


<n w-i 



s 






oo oo 


x> 


CM —i 


m 


CO i-H 


in 


T}- CO 


r- 


— i CO 


-* 


in 


>/-) 



3 



< 


c 


as 


< 


■c 


f— 


>e 


r^ 










Dtstrkt 

Hoke 

Scotland 


s 

5 


11 


— u 

-a 3 




Q DC 


S u 



3 

o 

r- 



f 

S 

o 
& 



03 



E £ £ 

jo a a 



3 

o 

S 



< 



5 o 



- e 9 
u a « 



S u 



3 

o 
H 

o 

s 

5 



BO £< 

5 If 

* i I 
a 2 as 



3 
o 
H 
o 



228 



so 

_ B 
IS 



■*j- co cn co r— 


cr, 


i/-> so oo cn no 


oo 


_ ^_ ,— CN 


r- 



I~~ 00 oo "3- 

Ifl N * * 

CO ■* 



N N m oo 


>/-) 


U-) ■* 


m co © 


OS O — i — 


cm 


in o 


t « n 


•-> rr CN 


oo 


cn cn 





C/5 

H 

H 






C/5 



sis 



*-5 

O 
(/J 



w 

K 
>< 

OS 

c 

< 
U 

Q 

2 



On 
00 

ON 



3 S 



y 

2 

H 



0< 

c 

3 



z K §8 

w 
s 

H 



3 



o o o o o 



O —I CN "-> 



^i o o so o 



o •-< so r- cn 



O O — O CO 



— >/"> O co f- 



O w-i tt oo 



N O « - 



« 0O N - 



« — CM •«* 



O O co -h 



co — i — i O 



-* CN © SO © 



O - N rt O 



© v-> © oo 



N N Tf h O 



co cn oo Os 


CN 


N W H O ^ 


CN 


— i Os CN 


T 


■* CO 


oo 



O O co O CO 



so 



<-" — < © >r> Tt « 



©©««-> 



m >o r- oo 



o cm o — < 



CN ^h cn \r> © 



,-, ^ TT 





E 










X 


.a 










■o 


Q 










n 












_c 












"5. 












1 


c 


© 


co \r> 


SO 


o 


■o 


3 




1—1 






c 


v 










3 


U 










1/1 

M 


■o 

1 


r^ 


SO CN 


■» 


CN 


In 

ss 


i 


CN 


— >n 




Tt 


X 
>> 


J2 

Q 










V 












s 












3 


"2 


O 

CN 


3 8 




CN 


c 


"3 








*— ' 














a 













OO OO CN Tt 



so — wi co 



OS Os O O 
O CO 



r^ 


— I CO 


CO 


_^ 


oo 


co r- 


Os 


^H 


O 


o 


■<r 


~^ 


CO 


oo 


CO Tf 




CO 


CN 



CO so SO oo 



*/"> Os Os Os co 



Os 


CO 


h h N h 


so 


On 


CN OO CO CO 


CO 


m 


.— < f— 1 



h 9 
ft 



c o u 

•2 2 £ 



■o 

c 
o 

e £• 

oo 



o 
H 

s 



u 5 « 



2£ 



< Q Q £ 



CO 




o 


© 


CO 


r~ 


© 


oo 




CN 


CO 


.— i 


o 


p» 


CO 












CN 


6rt 












c/3 


3 












3 


o 












o 


H 


2 


>-. 








H 


5 


2 
"C 

2 


■a 

=2 


11 


t/5 


C3 


s 

Q 




e 


< 


< 


>- 





5 s 



til I 

Nil 



i 



O 

H 
o 

s 



229 



_ e 



ffv OC O^ 
CI f vO 
O OC f^ 






— 


CO 


c^ 



, 1 


VO — 


T 


O O 


p- 


m cs 



cn oo 01 c-> r- 


ol 


— • c<"> -h o\ vo 


oi 


.-. -^ (^ 


S 



H 
H 
< 



[s3 
- 



a 5 * 

^ K SC 

28* 

C H £ 
fa, U = 

» 3 7 
£ P 4 

Z c/5 §5 

5 3 2 
S w - 

33 ^ "5 
>" Z "* 

as K 

H 
< 

E 

'-8 

c 

< 



u 

c 
u 

■o 
c 



2 



s 



•3 3 2 



■» t » 

tN tN 



co O r~ 

Ov vC •» 



O O O O CI 



oo <*-> ~* 



O tN O VO f~ 



r*-, — 



r- cs o r~ so 



•tr p~ o fo 



a 



x-i so — 



5 






o >/■> o o cn 



so >/"> o r- vr> 



.-h in ci <n 



O so O r'l -<T 



8 



, — 1 


r- t 


^* 


f» 


t v> 


o 


tN 


^ ^H 


r«-i 



<n 



s 



CO 



S -, 



t £ 



U U 



3 

o 
(- 

S 

M 

a 



— H 

Q 2 



< 

r» 

£ a 

5 2 

Q a 



09 







«S "O 


(- 


a jj 


trict 

velan 
coin 


s 

CS) 


if 


JO £ £ 


Q 


a G 3 




£> CD 



5 i j 



B & 

af s 
p _•? .>- 



3 
o 
H 
u 



5 k 2 £ <2 e= 



230 



© 



rr VI © <*"> 00 

* ^ N « f 



2 

o 



v\ 

oo" 



FH O O O O <-" tN 



5 



■8 



0. 



e 

L. 



■<s- — o o 



r-, — «H W-l 

— r- 



w 

H 
H 
< 

W 

2 

w 



C/3 

H 



S|5 



OS 

o 



S 

O 

H 

U 

ft 

|-s 
ft 
< 






C 

u 



ta U 

w 2 



© 

C 
3 
*1 



£ K §8 

H *■* os 

C< ft 2 

W -* 



o o o so © o o 



O — I o <-< o — < o 



i/-> O O oo «-* f% O 



£ o n t o ^ * 



u-i co O Ov O >/"> rH 



2 






o 



oo 



r<i ,-. 



SO 

00 






& 



ON 

SO 









3 




o 






o 
H 


W) 


District 3 

Cherokee 

Clay 

Graham 

Haywood 

Jackson 


c 

1 
2 


a 

■s 

(A 


s 
5 


a 

o 

a 

3 

00 



231 



FILING AND DISPOSITION TRENDS OF INFRACTIONS AND 
CRIMINAL CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

1979-80 — 1988-89 




All Cases 



Filings 




Motor Vehicle and 
Infraction 



Dispositions 



1,800,000 



1,200,000 




600,000 



Non-Motor Vehicle 



79-80 80-81 81-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 86-87 87-88 88-89 



Infraction cases are included with criminal motor vehicle cases 
here to show meaningful comparisons of trends from before 
and after 1986, when the infraction case category was first 
created. Almost all infractions would have been criminal motor 
vehicle cases before September 1, 1986. Motor vehicle 



misdemeanor and infraction case filings together increased by 
11.4% from 1987-88 to 1988-89, to a total of 1,145,833, of 
which 678,189 were infractions. Dispositions of such cases 
increased by 1 1.8%, to 1,1 12,120. Criminal non-motor vehicle 
filings in district court increased by 8.2% to 556,890. 



232 



MOTOR VEHICLE CRIMINAL CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 



District 1 

Camden 

Chowan 

Currituck 

Dare 

Gates 

Pasquotank 

Perquimans 



July 1, 


1988 -- June 


30, 1989 

Dispositions 




Filed 


Waiver 


Other 


Total Dispositions 


364 


98 


216 


314 


459 


178 


271 


449 


689 


229 


857 


1,086 


2,874 


820 


1,953 


2,773 


526 


99 


471 


570 


1,235 


248 


788 


1,036 


525 


250 


387 


637 



District Totals 



6,672 



1,922 



4,943 



6,865 



District 2 

Beaufort 

Hyde 

Martin 

Tyrrell 

Washington 



3,212 
461 

1,429 
796 

577 



720 
104 
511 
205 
212 



2,283 
364 

1,879 
611 
369 



3,003 
468 

2,390 
816 

581 



District Totals 



6,475 



1,752 



5,506 



7,258 



District 3 

Carteret 
Craven 
Pamlico 
Pitt 



4,097 

5,606 

411 

9,433 



1,040 

1,009 

99 

1,612 



3,193 

4,057 

215 

7,399 



4,233 

5,066 

314 

9,011 



District Totals 



19,547 



3,760 



14,864 



18,624 



District 4 

Duplin 
Jones 
Onslow 
Sampson 



2,462 

498 

7,279 

3,954 



609 

50 

1,337 

943 



1,739 

393 

5,749 

2,805 



2,348 

443 

7,086 

3,748 



District Totals 



14,193 



2,939 



10,686 



13,625 



District 5 

New Hanover 
Pender 



10,012 
2,134 



2,275 
310 



7,198 
1,833 



9,473 
2,143 



District Totals 



12,146 



2,585 



9,031 



11,616 



District 6 

Bertie 
Halifax 
Hertford 
Northampton 



936 
3,687 
1,988 
1,021 



244 
737 
500 
156 



827 
2,760 
1,550 
1,060 



1,071 
3,497 
2,050 
1,216 



District Totals 



7,632 



1,637 



6,197 



7,834 



233 



MOTOR VEHICLE CRIMINAL CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Dispositions 





Filed 


Waiver 


Other 


Total Dispositions 


District 7 










Edgecombe 


4,190 


1,304 


2,434 


3,738 


Nash 


6,643 


2,182 


3,741 


5,923 


Wilson 


3,900 


1,204 


2,356 


3,560 


District Totals 


14,733 


4,690 


8,531 


13,221 


District 8 










Greene 


850 


106 


671 


777 


Lenoir 


4,837 


910 


3,916 


4,826 


Wayne 


5,474 


1,115 


3,279 


4,394 


District Totals 


11,161 


2,131 


7,866 


9,997 


District 9 










Franklin 


1,983 


408 


1,465 


1,873 


Granville 


2,194 


466 


1,462 


1,928 


Person 


1,956 


316 


1,444 


1,760 


Vance 


2,984 


554 


2,151 


2,705 


Warren 


875 


169 


697 


866 


District Totals 


9,992 


1,913 


7,219 


9,132 


District 10 










Wake 


38,508 


5,412 


33,821 


39,233 


District 11 










Harnett 


5,201 


911 


3,332 


4,243 


Johnston 


5,994 


1,203 


4,046 


5,249 


Lee 


3,792 


986 


2,526 


3,512 


District Totals 


14,987 


3,100 


9,904 


13,004 


District 12 










Cumberland 


20,158 


3,329 


15,561 


18,890 


District 13 










Bladen 


2,372 


385 


1,824 


2,209 


Brunswick 


3,071 


2,363 


4,756 


7,119 


Columbus 


3,517 


479 


2,765 


3,244 


District Totals 


8,960 


3,227 


9,345 


12,572 


District 14 










Durham 


12,250 


2,291 


8,465 


10,756 


District ISA 










Alamance 


7,525 


1,658 


5,576 


7,234 



234 



MOTOR VEHICLE CRIMINAL CASE FILINGS AND 

DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Dispositions 





Filed 


Waiver 


Other 


Total Dispositions 


District 15B 










Chatham 


3,335 


610 


2,762 


3,372 


Orange 


5,907 


1,060 


4,232 


5,292 


District Totals 


9,242 


1,670 


6,994 


8,664 


District 16A 










Hoke 


2,590 


697 


2,022 


2,719 


Scotland 


2,069 


345 


1,690 


2,035 


District Totals 


4,659 


1,042 


3,712 


4,754 


District 16B 










Robeson 


7,205 


1,495 


4,981 


6,476 


District 17A 










Caswell 


1,146 


240 


876 


1,116 


Rockingham 


4,507 


934 


3,472 


4,406 


District Totals 


5,653 


1,174 


4,348 


5,522 


District 17B 










Stokes 


1,996 


510 


1,292 


1,802 


Surry 


3,528 


811 


2,407 


3,218 


District Totals 


5,524 


1,321 


3,699 


5,020 


District 18 










Guilford 


30,009 


3,957 


25,027 


28,984 


District 19A 










Cabarrus 


6,690 


1,396 


4,981 


6,377 


Rowan 


5,859 


1,307 


4,425 


5,732 


District Totals 


12,549 


2,703 


9,406 


12,109 


District 19B 










Montgomery 


2,099 


285 


1,607 


1,892 


Randolph 


5,442 


994 


4,649 


5,643 


District Totals 


7,541 


1,279 


6,256 


7,535 


District 20 










Anson 


2,083 


306 


1,612 


1,918 


Moore 


4,594 


887 


2,947 


3,834 


Richmond 


3,035 


765 


2,261 


3,026 


Stanly 


2,219 


556 


1,624 


2,180 


Union 


5,068 


1,107 


3,813 


4,920 


District Totals 


16,999 


3,621 


12,257 


15,878 


District 21 










Forsyth 


17,832 


2,930 


14,936 


17,866 



235 



MOTOR VEHICLE CRIMINAL CASE FILINGS AND 

DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Dispositions 





Filed 


Waiver 


Other 


Total Dispositions 


District 22 










Alexander 


1,128 


213 


906 


1,119 


Davidson 


8,090 


1,984 


5,794 


7,778 


Davie 


1,428 


306 


1,186 


1,492 


Iredell 


6,321 


1,584 


4,384 


5,968 


District Totals 


16,967 


4,087 


12,270 


16,357 


District 23 










Alleghany 


520 


146 


632 


778 


Ashe 


811 


166 


601 


767 


Wilkes 


3,020 


673 


2,025 


2,698 


Yadkin 


1,809 


410 


1,288 


1,698 


District Totals 


6,160 


1,395 


4,546 


5,941 


District 24 










Avery 


932 


191 


599 


790 


Madison 


987 


622 


387 


1,009 


Mitchell 


958 


292 


608 


900 


Watauga 


2,713 


1,271 


1,519 


2,790 


Yancey 


789 


495 


284 


779 


District Totals 


6,379 


2,871 


3,397 


6,268 


District 25 










Burke 


4,792 


1,236 


3,226 


4,462 


Caldwell 


5,387 


1,029 


3,904 


4,933 


Catawba 


6,694 


1,512 


4,783 


6,295 


District Totals 


16,873 


3,777 


11,913 


15,690 


District 26 










Mecklenburg 


46,373 


15,157 


24,655 


39,812 


District 27 A 










Gaston 


14,773 


3,173 


10,959 


14,132 


District 27B 










Cleveland 


5,467 


1,323 


4,250 


5,573 


Lincoln 


3,100 


747 


2,302 


3,049 


District Totals 


8,567 


2,070 


6,552 


8,622 


District 28 










Buncombe 


10,600 


3,477 


6,746 


10,223 



236 



MOTOR VEHICLE CRIMINAL CASE FILINGS AND 
DISPOSITIONS IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 





July 1, 


1988 -- June 


30, 1989 






Filed 




Dispositions 






Waiver 


Other 


Total Dispositions 


District 29 










Henderson 


4,372 


1,111 


3,093 


4,204 


McDowell 


1,980 


664 


1,089 


1,753 


Polk 


785 


264 


534 


798 


Rutherford 


3,681 


977 


2,351 


3,328 


Transylvania 


973 


230 


810 


1,040 


District Totals 


11,791 


3,246 


7,877 


11,123 


District 30 










Cherokee 


1,103 


264 


878 


1,142 


Clay 


270 


35 


265 


300 


Graham 


251 


77 


158 


235 


Haywood 


2,287 


458 


1,690 


2,148 


Jackson 


1,430 


374 


924 


1,298 


Macon 


896 


197 


724 


921 


Swain 


772 


203 


433 


636 


District Totals 


7,009 


1,608 


5,072 


6,680 


State Totals 


467,644 


104,399 


343,118 


447,517 



237 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 





Begin 










End 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/88 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


District 1 














Camden 


27 


218 


245 


224 


91.4% 


21 


Chowan 


128 


1,039 


1,167 


1,003 


85.9% 


164 


Currituck 


63 


512 


575 


513 


89.2% 


62 


Dare 


542 


2,753 


3,295 


2,775 


84.2% 


520 


Gates 


33 


454 


487 


452 


92.8% 


35 


Pasquotank 


196 


2,605 


2,801 


2,552 


91.1% 


249 


Perquimans 


54 


557 


611 


547 


89.5% 


64 


District Totals 


1,043 


8,138 


9,181 


8,066 


87.9% 


1,115 


District 2 














Beaufort 


300 


3,686 


3,986 


3,739 


93.8% 


247 


Hyde 


46 


579 


625 


584 


93.4% 


41 


Martin 


234 


1,372 


1,606 


1,496 


93.2% 


110 


Tyrrell 


27 


396 


423 


386 


91.3% 


37 


Washington 


52 


972 


1,024 


947 


92.5% 


77 


District Totals 


659 


7,005 


7,664 


7,152 


93.3% 


512 


District 3 














Carteret 


974 


6,002 


6,976 


5,769 


82.7% 


1,207 


Craven 


953 


7,633 


8,586 


6,979 


81.3% 


1,607 


Pamlico 


134 


759 


893 


710 


79.5% 


183 


Pitt 


1,939 


15,039 


16,978 


14,591 


85.9% 


2,387 


District Totals 


4,000 


29,433 


33,433 


28,049 


83.9% 


5,384 


District 4 














Duplin 


489 


3,134 


3,623 


3,096 


85.5% 


527 


Jones 


49 


534 


583 


530 


90.9% 


53 


Onslow 


1,145 


12,397 


13,542 


11,813 


87.2% 


1,729 


Sampson 


473 


3,997 


4,470 


3,785 


84.7% 


685 


District Totals 


2,156 


20,062 


22,218 


19,224 


86.5% 


2,994 


District 5 














New Hanover 


2,326 


16,267 


18,593 


15,425 


83.0% 


3,168 


Pender 


289 


1,814 


2,103 


1,798 


85.5% 


305 


District Totals 


2,615 


18,081 


20,696 


17,223 


83.2% 


3,473 


District 6 














Bertie 


104 


1,206 


1,310 


1,188 


90.7% 


122 


Halifax 


517 


5,685 


6,202 


5,327 


85.9% 


875 


Hertford 


207 


2,588 


2,795 


2,516 


90.0% 


279 


Northampton 


96 


1,222 


1,318 


1,141 


86.6% 


177 


District Totals 


924 


10,701 


11,625 


10,172 


87.5% 


1,453 



238 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 
July 1,1988 -June 30, 1989 

Begin 



District 7 
Edgecombe 

Nash 
Wilson 



Pending 

7/1/88 

1,210 
2,060 
1,598 



Filed 

7,431 

10,156 

7,260 



End 

Total % Caseload Pending 

Caseload Disposed Disposed 6/30/89 



8,641 

12,216 

8,858 



6,744 
9,734 
6,819 



78.0% 

79.7% 
77.0% 



1,897 
2,482 
2,039 



District Totals 4,868 24,847 29,715 



23,297 



78.4% 



6,418 



District 8 

Greene 
Lenoir 
Wayne 



183 

806 

1,286 



855 
5,352 
7,643 



1,038 
6,158 
8,929 



902 
5,168 
7,139 



86.9% 
83.9% 
80.0% 



136 

990 

1,790 



District Totals 2,275 13,850 16,125 



13,209 



81.9% 2,916 



District 9 

Franklin 

Granville 

Person 

Vance 

Warren 



295 
289 
320 
617 
121 



3,027 
3,086 
2,256 
5,451 
1,287 



3,322 
3,375 
2,576 
6,068 
1,408 



2,897 
3,050 
2,248 
5,249 
1,211 



87.2% 
90.4% 
87.3% 
86.5% 
86.0% 



425 
325 
328 
819 
197 



District Totals 1,642 15,107 16,749 



14,655 



87.5% 2,094 



District 10 

Wake 



8,054 35,828 43,882 



33,971 



77.4% 



9,911 



District 11 

Harnett 

Johnston 

Lee 



623 
809 
462 



5,549 
6,092 
5,108 



6,172 
6,901 
5,570 



5,054 
6,147 
4,958 



81.9% 
89.1% 
89.0% 



1,118 
754 
612 



District Totals 



1,894 



16,749 



18,643 16,159 



86.7% 2,484 



District 12 

Cumberland 



3,984 20,390 24,374 19,675 



80.7% 4,699 



District 13 

Bladen 

Brunswick 

Columbus 



281 
547 
463 



2,957 
3,652 
4,446 



3,238 
4,199 
4,909 



2,750 
3,457 
4,370 



84.9% 
82.3% 
89.0% 



488 
742 
539 



District Totals 



1,291 



11,055 12,346 



10,577 



85.7% 



1,769 



District 14 

Durham 



5,491 



17,631 



23,122 17,929 



77.5% 5,193 



District 15A 

Alamance 



941 



8,896 



9,837 



8,403 



85.4% 



1,434 



239 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1,1988 -June 30, 1989 

Begin End 

% Caseload Pending 



District 15B 

Chatham 
Orange 



Pending 

7/1/88 

369 

557 



Filed 

2,768 
4,984 



Total 
Caseload Disposed Disposed 



3,137 
5,541 



2,644 
4,854 



84.3% 
87.6% 



6/30/89 

493 
687 



District Totals 



926 



7,752 



8,678 



7,498 



86.4% 



1,180 



District 16A 

Hoke 

Scotland 



366 
462 



2,053 
4,524 



2,419 
4,986 



2,126 
4,346 



87.9% 
87.2% 



293 
640 



District Totals 



828 



6,577 



7,405 



6,472 



87.4% 



933 



District 16B 

Robeson 



1,523 



12,733 



14,256 11,893 



83.4% 2,363 



District 17A 

Caswell 
Rockingham 



107 
693 



1,012 
6,314 



1,119 
7,007 



1,038 
6,267 



92.8% 
89.4% 



81 
740 



District Totals 



800 



7,326 



8,126 



7,305 



89.9% 



821 



District 17B 

Stokes 
Surry 



223 
518 



1,569 
3,983 



1,792 
4,501 



1,526 
3,865 



85.2% 
85.9% 



266 
636 



District Totals 



741 



5,552 



6,293 



5,391 



85.7% 



902 



District 18 

Guilford 



13,351 38,898 52,249 33,845 



64.8% 18,404 



District 19A 

Cabarrus 
Rowan 



770 
743 



6,307 
6,062 



7,077 
6,805 



6,065 
6,028 



85.7% 
88.6% 



1,012 
777 



District Totals 



1,513 



12,369 



13,882 12,093 



87.1% 



1,789 



District 19B 

Montgomery 
Randolph 



412 
1,403 



2,772 
6,321 



3,184 
7,724 



2,700 
6,149 



84.8% 
79.6% 



484 
1,575 



District Totals 



1,815 



9,093 



10,908 



8,849 



81.1% 2,059 



District 20 

Anson 

Moore 

Richmond 

Stanly 

Union 



263 
628 
417 
360 
509 



2,139 
4,957 
4,225 
2,848 
4,933 



2,402 
5,585 
4,642 
3,208 
5,442 



2,136 
4,628 
4,074 
2,913 
4,814 



88.9% 
82.9% 
87.8% 
90.8% 
88.5% 



266 
957 
568 
295 
628 



District Totals 2,177 



19,102 



21,279 



18,565 



87.2% 



2,714 



240 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 
July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Begin 



District 21 

Forsyth 



Pending 

7/1/88 

2,976 



Filed 

22,988 



End 

Total % Caseload Pending 

Caseload Disposed Disposed 6/30/89 



25,964 22,743 



87.6% 



3,221 



District 22 

Alexander 
Davidson 
Davie 
Iredell 



209 
1,341 

199 
1,266 



1,704 

9,033 

1,539 

10,009 



1,913 
10,374 

1,738 
11,275 



1,617 
9,208 
1,304 
9,570 



84.5% 
88.8% 
75.0% 
84.9% 



296 
1,166 

434 
1,705 



District Totals 3,015 22,285 25,300 21,699 



85.8% 



3,601 



District 23 

Alleghany 
Ashe 
Wilkes 
Yadkin 



22 
100 
531 

75 



474 

809 

3,864 

1,283 



496 

909 

4,395 

1,358 



417 

820 

3,702 

1,238 



84.1% 
90.2% 
84.2% 
91 .2% 



79 

89 

693 

120 



District Totals 



728 



6,430 



7,158 



6,177 



86.3% 



981 



District 24 

Avery 

Madison 

Mitchell 

Watauga 

Yancey 



150 
125 

87 
338 

65 



754 
700 
598 
2,321 
498 



904 
825 
685 
2,659 
563 



696 
614 
618 
2,306 
444 



77.0% 
74.4% 
90.2% 
86.7% 
78.9% 



208 
211 
67 
353 
119 



District Totals 



765 



4,871 



5,636 



4,678 



83.0% 



958 



District 25 
Burke 
Caldwell 
Catawba 



582 

488 

1,214 



5,063 
4,246 
7,584 



5,645 
4,734 
8,798 



4,953 
4,029 

7,521 



87.7% 
85.1% 
85.5% 



692 

705 
1,277 



District Totals 2,284 



16,893 



19,177 16,503 



86.1% 2,674 



District 26 

Mecklenburg 



9,403 43,800 53,203 44,598 



83.8% 8,605 



District 27A 
Gaston 



3,467 



15,520 18,987 



13,896 



73.2% 



5,091 



District 27B 

Cleveland 
Lincoln 



801 
480 



5,619 

3,728 



6,420 
4,208 



5,572 
3,674 



86.8% 
87.3% 



848 
534 



District Totals 



1,281 



9,347 



10,628 



9,246 



87.0% 



1,382 



District 28 

Buncombe 



1,765 16,531 



18,296 15,654 



85.6% 



2,642 



241 



CASELOAD INVENTORY FOR CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 







July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 






Begin 










End 




Pending 




Total 




% Caseload 


Pending 




7/1/88 


Filed 


Caseload 


Disposed 


Disposed 


6/30/89 


District 29 














Henderson 


716 


4,810 


5,526 


4,625 


83.7% 


901 


McDowell 


299 


2,105 


2,404 


2,018 


83.9% 


386 


Polk 


93 


808 


901 


789 


87.6% 


112 


Rutherford 


804 


4,323 


5,127 


4,064 


79.3% 


1,063 


Transylvania 


306 


1,602 


1,908 


1,666 


87.3% 


242 



District Totals 2,218 



13,648 



15,866 



13,162 



83.0% 



2,704 



District 30 














Cherokee 


377 


1,433 


1,810 


1,535 


84.8% 


275 


Clay 


64 


279 


343 


312 


91.0% 


31 


Graham 


68 


446 


514 


458 


89.1% 


56 


Haywood 


233 


2,697 


2,930 


2,656 


90.6% 


274 


Jackson 


118 


1,156 


1,274 


1,102 


86.5% 


172 


Macon 


146 


783 


929 


832 


89.6% 


97 


Swain 


58 


608 


666 


579 


86.9% 


87 


District Totals 


1,064 


7,402 


8,466 


7,474 


88.3% 


992 


State Totals 


94,477 


556,890 


651,367 


535,502 


82.2% 


115,865 



242 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF DISTRICT COURT 
CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES 

July 1, 1988 — June 30, 1989 



MISDEMEANORS 



Other (45,043) 



Waiver (55,550) 



Dismissal (146,559) 



Not Guilty Plea (Trial) 
(40,155) 







Guilty Plea (196,979) 



FELONY PROBABLE CAUSE MATTERS 



Superseding Indictment 
(21,564) 




Heard and Bound Over 
(7,089) 

Probable Cause Not 
%\ Found (3,053) 



Probable Cause 

Hearing Waived 

(19,510) 



The waivers shown in the upper chart are waivers of trial in 
worthless check cases where the defendant pleads guilty before 
a magistrate. The "Other" category includes changes of venue, 
waivers of extradition, findings of no probable cause at initial 
appearance, and dismissals by the court. Waivers and trials of 
misdemeanors in district court decreased in absolute numbers 



from 1987-88 to 1988-89 (923 fewer waivers and 964 fewer 
trials). Misdemeanors disposed by guilty plea increased by 
1 9,969 dispositions, an 1 1 .3% increase. The proportion of felony 
cases disposed by superseding indictment continues to increase; 
these dispositions totalled 34. 1% of felony dispositions in 1986- 
87, 38.1% in 1987-88, and 42.1% in 1988-89. 



243 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CRIMINAL 

NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Felony 





Worthless 






Not 


Dismissed 




Probable 






Check 
Waiver 


Guilty Plea 


Guilty 
Plea 


by 

DA 


Other 


Cause 
Matters 


Total 




Judge 


Magistrate 


Disposed 


District 1 


















Camden 


3 


73 


25 


41 


22 


41 


19 


224 


Chowan 


76 


400 


40 


88 


256 


21 


122 


1,003 


Currituck 


33 


244 


6 


6 


102 


84 


38 


513 


Dare 


160 


644 


5 


169 


750 


800 


247 


2,775 


Gates 


27 


166 


20 


70 


111 


16 


42 


452 


Pasquotank 


164 


1,016 


72 


377 


487 


152 


284 


2,552 


Perquimans 


7 


241 


9 


64 


103 


45 


78 


547 


District Totals 


470 


2,784 


177 


815 


1,831 


1,159 


830 


8,066 


% of Total 


5.8% 


34.5% 


2.2% 


10.1% 


22.7% 


14.4% 


10.3% 


100.0% 


District 2 


















Beaufort 


385 


1,246 


427 


505 


384 


403 


389 


3,739 


Hyde 


13 


174 


173 


98 


54 


31 


41 


584 


Martin 


326 


503 


17 


188 


167 


186 


109 


1,496 


Tyrrell 


16 


127 


88 


54 


54 


21 


26 


386 


Washington 


178 


281 


92 


171 


63 


50 


112 


947 


District Totals 


918 


2,331 


797 


1,016 


722 


691 


677 


7,152 


% of Total 


12.8% 


32.6% 


11.1% 


14.2% 


10.1% 


9.7% 


9.5% 


100.0% 


District 3 


















Carteret 


579 


1,567 


867 


199 


1,797 


420 


340 


5,769 


Craven 


1,114 


2,103 


352 


317 


1,711 


660 


722 


6,979 


Pamlico 


44 


231 


106 


42 


182 


96 


9 


710 


Pitt 


3,055 


4,850 


477 


909 


2,738 


695 


1,867 


14,591 


District Totals 


4,792 


8,751 


1,802 


1,467 


6,428 


1,871 


2,938 


28,049 


% of Total 


17.1% 


31.2% 


6.4% 


5.2% 


22.9% 


6.7% 


10.5% 


100.0% 


District 4 


















Duplin 


553 


1,258 


51 


91 


433 


379 


331 


3,096 


Jones 


10 


188 





35 


82 


147 


68 


530 


Onslow 


2,637 


4,650 


193 


536 


1,561 


864 


1,372 


11,813 


Sampson 


766 


1,583 


43 


83 


765 


138 


407 


3,785 


District Totals 


3,966 


7,679 


287 


745 


2,841 


1,528 


2,178 


19,224 


% of Total 


20.6% 


39.9% 


1.5% 


3.9% 


14.8% 


7.9% 


11.3% 


100.0% 


District 5 


















New Hanover 


1,559 


6,182 


541 


1,178 


2,995 


1,270 


1,700 


15,425 


Pender 


49 


702 


2 


151 


460 


212 


222 


1,798 


District Totals 


1,608 


6,884 


543 


1,329 


3,455 


1,482 


1,922 


17,223 


% of Total 


9.3% 


40.0% 


3.2% 


7.7% 


20.1% 


8.6% 


11.2% 


100.0% 



244 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CRIMINAL 
NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Felony 





Worthless 






Not 


Dismissed 




Probable 






Check 
Waiver 


Guilty 


Plea 


Guilty 
Plea 


by 
DA 


Other 


Cause 
Matters 


Total 




Judge 


Magistrate 


Disposed 


District 6 


















Bertie 


46 


432 


61 


126 


237 


184 


102 


1,188 


Halifax 


273 


1,995 


228 


398 


1,485 


498 


450 


5,327 


Hertford 


195 


1,253 


82 


156 


418 


292 


120 


2,516 


Northampton 


74 


402 


42 


103 


247 


152 


121 


1,141 


District Totals 


588 


4,082 


413 


783 


2,387 


1,126 


793 


10,172 


% of Total 


5.8% 


40.1% 


4.1% 


7.7% 


23.5% 


11.1% 


7.8% 


100.0% 


District 7 


















Edgecombe 


700 


2,604 


196 


697 


1,425 


402 


720 


6,744 


Nash 


1,869 


3,273 


489 


702 


2,092 


394 


915 


9,734 


Wilson 


921 


2,584 


204 


408 


1,592 


276 


834 


6,819 


District Totals 


3,490 


8,461 


889 


1,807 


5,109 


1,072 


2,469 


23,297 


% of Total 


15.0% 


36.3% 


3.8% 


7.8% 


21.9% 


4.6% 


10.6% 


100.0% 


District 8 


















Greene 


64 


209 


47 


65 


343 


70 


104 


902 


Lenoir 


520 


1,509 


44 


237 


2,091 


419 


348 


5,168 


Wayne 


1,186 


2,171 


65 


218 


2,671 


422 


406 


7,139 


District Totals 


1,770 


3,889 


156 


520 


5,105 


911 


858 


13,209 


% of Total 


13.4% 


29.4% 


1.2% 


3.9% 


38.6% 


6.9% 


6.5% 


100.0% 


District 9 


















Franklin 


396 


1,015 


167 


338 


468 


186 


327 


2,897 


Granville 


303 


1,082 


114 


247 


446 


302 


556 


3,050 


Person 


208 


781 


120 


257 


416 


161 


305 


2,248 


Vance 


468 


1,946 


300 


666 


865 


510 


494 


5,249 


Warren 


73 


390 


26 


192 


226 


161 


143 


1,211 


District Totals 


1,448 


5,214 


727 


1,700 


2,421 


1,320 


1,825 


14,655 


% of Total 


9.9% 


35.6% 


5.0% 


1 1 .6% 


16.5% 


9.0% 


12.5% 


100.0% 


District 10 


















Wake 


5,133 


9,809 


3,294 


1,723 


8,859 


2,032 


3,121 


33,971 


% of Total 


15.1% 


28.9% 


9.7% 


5.1% 


26.1% 


6.0% 


9.2% 


100.0% 


District 11 


















Harnett 


586 


1,696 


153 


251 


1,043 


712 


613 


5,054 


Johnston 


911 


2,132 


258 


441 


1,187 


839 


379 


6,147 


Lee 


670 


1,712 


433 


327 


1,033 


417 


366 


4,958 


District Totals 


2,167 


5,540 


844 


1,019 


3,263 


1,968 


1,358 


16,159 


% of Total 


13.4% 


34.3% 


5.2% 


6.3% 


20.2% 


12.2% 


8.4% 


100.0% 


District 12 


















Cumberland 


3,356 


6,603 


117 


1,542 


5,810 


594 


1,653 


19,675 


% of Total 


17.1% 


33.6% 


0.6% 


7.8% 


29.5% 


3.0% 


8.4% 


100.0% 



245 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CRIMINAL 

NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Felony 





Worthless 






Not 


Dismissed 




Probable 






Check 
Waiver 


Guilty Plea 


Guilty 
Plea 


by 

DA 


Other 


Cause 
Matters 


Total 




Judge 


Magistrate 


Disposed 


District 13 


















Bladen 


394 


887 


62 


263 


672 


372 


100 


2,750 


Brunswick 


367 


1,131 


401 


273 


894 


119 


272 


3,457 


Columbus 


854 


1,540 


24 


355 


1,010 


386 


201 


4,370 


District Totals 


1,615 


3,558 


487 


891 


2,576 


877 


573 


10,577 


% of Total 


15.3% 


33.6% 


4.6% 


8.4% 


24.4% 


8.3% 


5.4% 


100.0% 


District 14 


















Durham 


1,135 


6,394 


40 


914 


5,847 


1,961 


1,638 


17,929 


% of Total 


6.3% 


35.7% 


0.2% 


5.1% 


32.6% 


10.9% 


9.1% 


100.0% 


District 15A 


















Alamance 


731 


3,549 


268 


726 


1,438 


418 


1,273 


8,403 


% of Total 


8.7% 


42.2% 


3.2% 


8.6% 


17.1% 


5.0% 


15.1% 


100.0% 


District 1SB 


















Chatham 


144 


761 


80 


98 


546 


764 


251 


2,644 


Orange 


422 


1,528 


116 


230 


1,545 


333 


680 


4,854 


District Totals 


566 


2,289 


196 


328 


2,091 


1,097 


931 


7,498 


% of Total 


7.5% 


30.5% 


2.6% 


4.4% 


27.9% 


14.6% 


12.4% 


100.0% 


District 16A 


















Hoke 


364 


36 


2 


1,155 


317 


134 


118 


2,126 


Scotland 


524 


1,895 


92 


532 


606 


343 


354 


4,346 


District Totals 


888 


1,931 


94 


1,687 


923 


477 


472 


6,472 


% of Total 


13.7% 


29.8% 


1.5% 


26.1% 


14.3% 


7.4% 


7.3% 


100.0% 


District 16B 


















Robeson 


1,564 


4,885 


273 


1,290 


373 


1,502 


2,006 


11,893 


% of Total 


13.2% 


41.1% 


2.3% 


10.8% 


3.1% 


12.6% 


16.9% 


100.0% 


District 17A 


















Caswell 


61 


282 


56 


220 


150 


97 


172 


1,038 


Rockingham 


300 


2,166 


134 


1,115 


1,049 


559 


944 


6,267 


District Totals 


361 


2,448 


190 


1,335 


1,199 


656 


1,116 


7,305 


% of Total 


4.9% 


33.5% 


2.6% 


18.3% 


16.4% 


9.0% 


15.3% 


100.0% 


District 17B 

Stokes 


110 


336 


15 


202 


294 


271 


298 


1,526 


Surry 


267 


1,092 


251 


356 


680 


437 


782 


3,865 


District Totals 
% of Total 


377 
7.0% 


1,428 
26.5% 


266 

4.9% 


558 

10.4% 


974 
18.1% 


708 
13.1% 


1,080 
20.0% 


5,391 
100.0% 


District 18 

Guilford 
% of Total 


1,036 

3.1% 


10,689 
31.6% 


1,303 
3.8% 


1,553 
4.6% 


14,125 
41.7% 


2,285 
6.8% 


2,854 
8.4% 


33,845 
100.0% 



246 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CRIMINAL 

NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

















Felony 






Worthless 






Not 


Dismissed 




Probable 






Check 
Waiver 


Guilty Plea 


Guilty 
Plea 


by 

DA 


Other 


Cause 
Matters 


Total 




Judge 


Magistrate 


Disposed 


District 19A 


















Cabarrus 


1,053 


1,657 


179 


735 


1,244 


326 


871 


6,065 


Rowan 


545 


1,530 


90 


751 


1,475 


617 


1,020 


6,028 


District Totals 


1,598 


3,187 


269 


1,486 


2,719 


943 


1,891 


12,093 


% of Total 


13.2% 


26.4% 


2.2% 


12.3% 


22.5% 


7.8% 


15.6% 


100.0% 


District 19B 


















Montgomery 


234 


657 


629 


211 


810 


46 


113 


2,700 


Randolph 


841 


2,168 


45 


465 


1,809 


134 


687 


6,149 


District Totals 


1,075 


2,825 


674 


676 


2,619 


180 


800 


8,849 


% of Total 


12.1% 


31.9% 


7.6% 


7.6% 


29.6% 


2.0% 


9.0% 


100.0% 


District 20 


















Anson 


93 


541 


198 


474 


531 


126 


173 


2,136 


Moore 


692 


1,220 


400 


436 


860 


267 


753 


4,628 


Richmond 


116 


1,278 


406 


685 


865 


240 


484 


4,074 


Stanly 


404 


843 


255 


404 


437 


226 


344 


2,913 


Union 


812 


1,459 


133 


609 


775 


446 


580 


4,814 


District Totals 


2,117 


5,341 


1,392 


2,608 


3,468 


1,305 


2,334 


18,565 


% of Total 


11.4% 


28.8% 


7.5% 


14.0% 


18.7% 


7.0% 


12.6% 


100.0% 


District 21 


















Forsyth 


1,953 


7,633 





2,637 


6,326 


1,510 


2,684 


22,743 


% of Total 


8.6% 


33.6% 


0.0% 


11.6% 


27.8% 


6.6% 


11.8% 


100.0% 


District 22 


















Alexander 


97 


486 





160 


542 


275 


57 


1,617 


Davidson 


278 


3,218 


228 


486 


3,876 


882 


240 


9,208 


Davie 


108 


265 


32 


149 


538 


151 


61 


1,304 


Iredell 


654 


3,617 


385 


571 


3,066 


813 


464 


9,570 


District Totals 


1,137 


7,586 


645 


1,366 


8,022 


2,121 


822 


21,699 


% of Total 


5.2% 


35.0% 


3.0% 


6.3% 


37.0% 


9.8% 


3.8% 


100.0% 


District 23 


















Alleghany 


58 


103 


20 


130 


59 


27 


20 


417 


Ashe 


144 


259 


7 


122 


110 


109 


69 


820 


Wilkes 


292 


1,459 


179 


585 


530 


293 


364 


3,702 


Yadkin 


83 


398 





242 


124 


134 


257 


1,238 


District Totals 


577 


2,219 


206 


1,079 


823 


563 


710 


6,177 


% of Total 


9.3% 


35.9% 


3.3% 


17.5% 


13.3% 


9.1% 


11.5% 


100.0% 



247 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CRIMINAL 
NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Felony 





Worthless 






Not 


Dismissed 




Probable 






Check 
Waiver 


Guilty Plea 


Guilty 
Plea 


by 

DA 


Other 


Cause 
Matters 


Total 




Judge 


Magistrate 


Disposed 


District 24 


















Avery 


6? 


92 


19 


95 


262 


96 


69 


696 


Madison 


53 


58 


11 


77 


243 


86 


86 


614 


Mitchell 


44 


146 


30 


60 


233 


71 


34 


618 


Watauga 


462 


452 


167 


97 


774 


204 


150 


2,306 


Yancey 


45 


61 


35 


83 


117 


66 


37 


444 


District Totals 


667 


809 


262 


412 


1,629 


523 


376 


4,678 


% of Total 


14.3% 


17.3% 


5.6% 


8.8% 


34.8% 


11.2% 


8.0% 


100.0% 


District 25 


















Burke 


533 


1,555 


54 


203 


1,411 


751 


446 


4,953 


Caldwell 


281 


1,324 


277 


264 


762 


567 


554 


4,029 


Catawba 


785 


2,515 


148 


483 


1,934 


836 


820 


7,521 


District Totals 


1,599 


5,394 


479 


950 


4,107 


2,154 


1,820 


16,503 


% of Total 


9.7% 


32.7% 


2.9% 


5.8% 


24.9% 


13.1% 


1 1 .0% 


100.0% 


District 26 


















Mecklenburg 


1,247 


12,160 


302 


1,645 


22,580 


5,566 


1,098 


44,598 


% of Total 


2.8% 


27.3% 


0.7% 


3.7% 


50.6% 


12.5% 


2.5% 


100.0% 


District 27A 


















Gaston 


547 


3,881 


418 


1,116 


5,086 


1,346 


1,502 


13,896 


% of Total 


3.9% 


27.9% 


3.0% 


8.0% 


36.6% 


9.7% 


10.8% 


100.0% 


District 27B 


















Cleveland 


383 


1,852 


292 


414 


1,592 


509 


530 


5,572 


Lincoln 


485 


972 


239 


197 


814 


601 


366 


3,674 


District Totals 


868 


2,824 


531 


611 


2,406 


1,110 


896 


9,246 


% of Total 


9.4% 


30.5% 


5.7% 


6.6% 


26.0% 


12.0% 


9.7% 


100.0% 


District 28 


















Buncombe 


2,967 


7,143 


248 


564 


2,912 


666 


1,154 


15,654 


% of Total 


19.0% 


45.6% 


1.6% 


3.6% 


18.6% 


4.3% 


7.4% 


100.0% 


District 29 


















Henderson 


279 


1,601 


494 


237 


1,174 


298 


542 


4,625 


McDowell 


144 


556 


221 


137 


621 


142 


197 


2,018 


Polk 


8 


313 


21 


69 


257 


70 


51 


789 


Rutherford 


265 


1,543 


288 


326 


1,132 


124 


386 


4,064 


Transylvania 


104 


698 


208 


62 


345 


71 


178 


1,666 


District Totals 


800 


4,711 


1,232 


831 


3,529 


705 


1,354 


13,162 


% of Total 


6.1% 


35.8% 


9.4% 


6.3% 


26.8% 


5.4% 


10.3% 


100.0% 



248 



MANNER OF DISPOSITION OF CRIMINAL 
NON-MOTOR VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Felony 





Worthless 






Not 


Dismissed 




Probable 






Check 

Waiver 


Guilty 


Plea 


Guilty 
Plea 


by 

DA 


Other 


Cause 
Matters 


Total 




Judge 


Magistrate 


Disposed 


District 30 


















Cherokee 


136 


300 


9 


29 


609 


218 


234 


1,535 


Clay 


5 


94 


11 


20 


137 


5 


40 


312 


Graham 


1 


152 


11 


48 


125 


68 


53 


458 


Haywood 


156 


808 


120 


202 


842 


151 


377 


2,656 


Jackson 


51 


248 


99 


57 


296 


70 


281 


1,102 


Macon 


62 


174 


49 


38 


346 


88 


75 


832 


Swain 


8 


106 


66 


32 


201 


16 


150 


579 


District Totals 


419 


1,882 


365 


426 


2,556 


616 


1,210 


7,474 


% of Total 


5.6% 


25.2% 


4.9% 


5.7% 


34.2% 


8.2% 


16.2% 


100.0% 


State Totals 


55,550 


176,793 


20,186 


40,155 


146,559 


45,043 


51,216 


535,502 


% of Total 


10.4% 


33.0% 


3.8% 


7.5% 


27.4% 


8.4% 


9.6% 


100.0% 



249 



AGES OF PENDING CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 









Ages of Pending Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 

Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 1 




















Camden 


:i 

















21 


29.1 


24.0 


Chowan 


137 





2 


18 


7 





164 


77.6 


29.0 


Currituck 


53 


1 


2 


5 


1 





62 


51.3 


24.0 


Dare 


453 


14 


9 


33 


7 


4 


520 


54.0 


15.0 


Gates 


35 

















35 


32.1 


35.0 


Pasquotank 


218 


6 


19 


6 








249 


39.7 


21.0 


Perquimans 


53 


6 


3 


1 


1 





64 


46.1 


29.0 


District Totals 


970 


27 


35 


63 


16 


4 


1,115 


52.5 


22.0 


% of Total 


87.0% 


2.4% 


3.1% 


5.7% 


1.4% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






District 2 




















Beaufort 


199 


11 


22 


8 


6 


1 


247 


55.5 


17.0 


Hyde 


33 





1 


3 


4 





41 


83.9 


29.0 


Martin 


90 


3 


6 


7 


4 





110 


59.0 


22.0 


Tyrrell 


35 


1 





1 








37 


30.9 


14.0 


Washington 


55 


5 


8 


7 


2 





77 


75.4 


36.0 


District Totals 


412 


20 


37 


26 


16 


1 


512 


59.8 


22.0 


% of Total 


80.5% 


3.9% 


7.2% 


5.1% 


3.1% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 3 




















Carteret 


870 


97 


87 


120 


32 


1 


1,207 


78.5 


39.0 


Craven 


1,016 


124 


226 


172 


52 


17 


1,607 


106.8 


57.0 


Pamlico 


93 


15 


14 


44 


13 


4 


183 


153.6 


87.0 


Pitt 


1,666 


205 


315 


151 


50 





2,387 


76.6 


50.0 


District Totals 


3,645 


441 


642 


487 


147 


22 


5,384 


88.7 


51.0 


% of Total 


67.7% 


8.2% 


11.9% 


9.0% 


2.7% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






District 4 




















Duplin 


418 


43 


44 


22 








527 


59.4 


42.0 


Jones 


30 


5 


3 


15 








53 


98.2 


62.0 


Onslow 


1,314 


159 


95 


152 


9 





1,729 


63.9 


39.0 


Sampson 


583 


25 


44 


29 


4 





685 


51.6 


29.0 


District Totals 


2,345 


232 


186 


218 


13 





2,994 


60.9 


37.0 


% of Total 


78.3% 


7.7% 


6.2% 


7.3% 


0.4% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 5 




















New Hanover 


2,113 


126 


156 


404 


282 


87 


3,168 


142.9 


39.0 


Pender 


189 


12 


12 


36 


29 


27 


305 


207.8 


52.0 


District Totals 


2,302 


138 


168 


440 


311 


114 


3,473 


148.6 


42.0 


% of Total 


66.3% 


4.0% 


4.8% 


12.7% 


9.0% 


3.3% 


100.0% 







250 



AGES OF PENDING CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 









Ages of Pending Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 6 




















Bertie 


113 


1 


5 


3 








122 


33.5 


17.0 


Halifax 


647 


69 


77 


53 


29 





875 


68.6 


29.0 


Hertford 


251 


12 


4 


9 


3 





279 


41.7 


24.0 


Northampton 


131 


29 


7 


10 








177 


57.5 


30.0 


District Totals 


1,142 


111 


93 


75 


32 





1,453 


59.1 


28.0 


% of Total 


78.6% 


7.6% 


6.4% 


5.2% 


2.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 7 




















Edgecombe 


1,313 


109 


129 


242 


79 


25 


1,897 


100.3 


46.0 


Nash 


1,554 


197 


272 


292 


126 


41 


2,482 


118.2 


53.0 


Wilson 


1,198 


216 


233 


260 


115 


17 


2,039 


114.7 


67.0 


District Totals 


4,065 


522 


634 


794 


320 


83 


6,418 


111.8 


53.0 


% of Total 


63.3% 


8.1% 


9.9% 


12.4% 


5.0% 


1.3% 


100.0% 






District 8 




















Greene 


89 


8 


16 


13 


10 





136 


111.8 


73.0 


Lenoir 


726 


94 


92 


64 


12 


2 


990 


71.2 


45.0 


Wayne 


1,127 


196 


233 


198 


35 


1 


1,790 


91.1 


64.0 


District Totals 


1,942 


298 


341 


275 


57 


3 


2,916 


85.3 


58.0 


% of Total 


66.6% 


10.2% 


11.7% 


9.4% 


2.0% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 9 




















Franklin 


349 


21 


15 


24 


15 


1 


425 


67.8 


25.0 


Granville 


230 


24 


25 


28 


12 


6 


325 


92.7 


45.0 


Person 


208 


9 


2 


34 


74 


1 


328 


192.4 


53.0 


Vance 


554 


42 


85 


70 


42 


26 


819 


123.4 


36.0 


Warren 


157 


3 


14 


14 


6 


3 


197 


77.7 


25.0 


District Totals 


1,498 


99 


141 


170 


149 


37 


2,094 


113.8 


36.0 


% of Total 


71.5% 


4.7% 


6.7% 


8.1% 


7.1% 


1.8% 


100.0% 






District 10 




















Wake 


4,725 


773 


830 


1,588 


1,010 


985 


9,911 


245.7 


100.0 


% of Total 


47.7% 


7.8% 


8.4% 


16.0% 


10.2% 


9.9% 


100.0% 






District 11 




















Harnett 


541 


93 


103 


238 


130 


13 


1,118 


161.5 


95.0 


Johnston 


588 


70 


52 


42 


1 


1 


754 


58.1 


38.5 


Lee 


502 


33 


46 


23 


7 


1 


612 


56.3 


31.0 


District Totals 


1,631 


196 


201 


303 


138 


15 


2,484 


104.2 


46.0 


% of Total 


65.7% 


7.9% 


8.1% 


12.2% 


5.6% 


0.6% 


100.0% 






District 12 




















Cumberland 


2,948 


451 


577 


511 


196 


16 


4,699 


98.9 


59.0 


% of Total 


62.7% 


9.6% 


12.3% 


10.9% 


4.2% 


0.3% 


100.0% 







251 



District 13 

Bladen 
Brunswick 

Columbus 



AGES OF PENDING CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 

Ages of Pending Cases (Days) 



0-90 

405 
527 
452 



Total Mean 

91-120 121-180 181-365 366-730 >730 Pending Age 



23 
30 
20 



12 
38 
18 



39 

57 
34 



7 

70 

7 



2 
20 



488 63.8 

742 128.7 
539 70.1 



Median 
Age 

22.0 
37.0 
29.0 



District Totals 
% of Total 



1,384 
78.2% 



73 
4.1% 



68 
3.8% 



130 

7.3% 



84 

4.7% 



30 

1.7% 



1,769 
100.0% 



93.0 



29.0 



District 14 

Durham 
% of Total 



2,754 
53.0% 



429 
8.3% 



624 820 

12.0% 15.8% 



459 107 5,193 154.7 

8.8% 2.1% 100.0% 



81.0 



District ISA 

Alamance 
% of Total 



1,056 
73.6% 



60 

4.2% 



177 104 

12.3% 7.3% 



36 1 1,434 71.6 

2.5% 0.1% 100.0% 



30.0 



District 15B 

Chatham 
Orange 



427 
570 



22 
44 



12 
29 



19 
33 



13 
10 



493 
687 



52.4 
60.4 



29.0 
36.0 



District Totals 997 66 41 52 23 1 1,180 57.1 

%ofTotal 84.5% 5.6% 3.5% 4.4% 1.9% 0.1% 100.0% 



30.0 



District 16A 
Hoke 

Scotland 



234 
430 



21 

33 



20 
42 



13 
46 



4 
61 



1 
28 



293 
640 



67.9 
144.3 



38.0 
40.5 



District Totals 664 54 62 59 65 29 933 120.3 

% of Total 71.2% 5.8% 6.6% 6.3% 7.0% 3.1% 100.0% 



39.0 



District 16B 

Robeson 
% of Total 



1,273 144 164 308 428 46 2,363 178.8 

53.9% 6.1% 6.9% 13.0% 18.1% 1.9% 100.0% 



74.0 



District 17A 

Caswell 
Rockingham 



61 
625 



5 
30 



10 

27 



4 

45 




12 



81 
740 



65.2 
56.7 



28.0 
23.0 



District Totals 
% of Total 



686 
83.6% 



35 

4.3% 



37 
4.5% 



49 



12 
1.5% 



2 
0.2% 



821 57.5 

100.0% 



24.0 



District 17B 

Stokes 
Surry 



221 
544 



6 
33 



16 
38 



21 
13 



266 
636 



56.6 
54.6 



24.0 
35.0 



District Totals 765 39 54 34 7 3 902 55.2 

% of Total 84.8% 4.3% 6.0% 3.8% 0.8% 0.3% 100.0% 



31.0 



DLstrlct 18 

Guilford 
% of Total 



7,897 1,658 

42.9% 9.0% 



2,165 3,470 2,550 

11.8% 18.9% 13.9% 



664 18,404 193.1 

3.6% 100.0% 



114.0 



252 



AGES OF PENDING CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 









Ages of Penc 


ling Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 

Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 19A 




















Cabarrus 


785 


29 


63 


113 


22 





1,012 


69.5 


29.0 


Rowan 


697 


24 


34 


18 


4 





777 


41.6 


22.0 


District Totals 


1,482 


53 


97 


131 


26 





1,789 


57.4 


25.0 


% of Total 


82.8% 


3.0% 


5.4% 


7.3% 


1.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 19B 




















Montgomery 


298 


42 


29 


49 


43 


23 


484 


166.9 


63.0 


Randolph 


1,094 


158 


137 


115 


71 





1,575 


84.2 


45.0 


District Totals 


1,392 


200 


166 


164 


114 


23 


2,059 


103.6 


50.0 


% of Total 


67.6% 


9.7% 


8.1% 


8.0% 


5.5% 


1.1% 


100.0% 






District 20 




















Anson 


226 


12 


16 


4 


6 


2 


266 


57.2 


24.0 


Moore 


569 


27 


41 


134 


111 


75 


957 


189.1 


46.0 


Richmond 


481 


10 


10 


38 


27 


2 


568 


69.3 


21.0 


Stanly 


267 


5 


17 


6 








295 


37.1 


21.0 


Union 


498 


30 


28 


21 


12 


39 


628 


206.8 


25.0 


District Totals 


2,041 


84 


112 


203 


156 


118 


2,714 


138.7 


28.0 


% of Total 


75.2% 


3.1% 


4.1% 


7.5% 


5.7% 


4.3% 


100.0% 






District 21 




















Forsyth 


1,877 


142 


265 


495 


358 


84 


3,221 


159.0 


51.0 


% of Total 


58.3% 


4.4% 


8.2% 


15.4% 


11.1% 


2.6% 


100.0% 






District 22 




















Alexander 


247 


20 


16 


13 








296 


56.0 


36.0 


Davidson 


1,036 


70 


42 


7 


4 


7 


1,166 


43.7 


24.0 


Davie 


250 


39 


29 


74 


40 


2 


434 


137.4 


69.5 


IredeU 


1,450 


89 


83 


52 


25 


6 


1,705 


51.5 


25.0 


District Totals 


2,983 


218 


170 


146 


69 


15 


3,601 


59.7 


30.0 


% of Total 


82.8% 


6.1% 


4.7% 


4.1% 


1.9% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






District 23 




















Alleghany 


56 


4 


5 


12 


1 


1 


79 


82.9 


22.0 


Ashe 


55 


1 


4 


2 


5 


22 


89 


371.9 


38.0 


Wilkes 


353 


61 


58 


41 


122 


58 


693 


223.0 


86.0 


Yadkin 


111 





9 











120 


34.5 


23.0 


District Totals 


575 


66 


76 


55 


128 


81 


981 


202.2 


57.0 


% of Total 


58.6% 


6.7% 


7.7% 


5.6% 


13.0% 


8.3% 


100.0% 







253 



AGES OF PENDING CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 









Ages of Pending Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 24 




















Avery 


130 


24 


19 


18 


10 


7 


208 


140.3 


72.0 


Madison 


121 


21 


25 


24 


17 


3 


211 


135.8 


73.0 


Mitchell 


47 


5 


9 


5 


1 





67 


70.7 


30.0 


Watauga 


258 


35 


22 


23 


13 


2 


353 


85.2 


45.0 


Yancey 


110 





3 


5 


1 





119 


42.1 


24.0 


District Totals 


666 


85 


78 


75 


42 


12 


958 


101.9 


52.0 


% of Total 


69.5% 


8.9% 


8.1% 


7.8% 


4.4% 


1.3% 


100.0% 






District 25 




















Burke 


581 


44 


43 


17 


5 


2 


692 


49.7 


25.0 


Caldwell 


535 


67 


39 


23 


30 


11 


705 


78.9 


28.0 


Catawba 


968 


107 


99 


92 


9 


2 


1,277 


65.6 


37.0 


District Totals 


2,084 


218 


181 


132 


44 


15 


2,674 


65.0 


30.0 


% of Total 


77.9% 


8.2% 


6.8% 


4.9% 


1.6% 


0.6% 


100.0% 






District 26 




















Mecklenburg 


4,559 


531 


732 


1,431 


1,046 


306 


8,605 


173.9 


77.0 


% of Total 


53.0% 


6.2% 


8.5% 


16.6% 


12.2% 


3.6% 


100.0% 






District 27A 




















Gaston 


2,650 


521 


551 


938 


356 


75 


5,091 


142.2 


81.0 


% of Total 


52.1% 


10.2% 


10.8% 


18.4% 


7.0% 


1.5% 


100.0% 






District 27B 




















Cleveland 


631 


43 


51 


100 


19 


4 


848 


81.5 


37.0 


Lincoln 


413 


24 


28 


19 


25 


25 


534 


118.5 


25.0 


District Totals 


1,044 


67 


79 


119 


44 


29 


1,382 


95.8 


31.0 


% of Total 


75.5% 


4.8% 


5.7% 


8.6% 


3.2% 


2.1% 


100.0% 






District 28 




















Buncombe 


1,931 


219 


231 


213 


47 


1 


2,642 


71.8 


39.0 


% of Total 


73.1% 


8.3% 


8.7% 


8.1% 


1.8% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 29 




















Henderson 


629 


45 


75 


105 


40 


7 


901 


99.5 


44.0 


McDowell 


263 


50 


25 


21 


21 


6 


386 


99.8 


49.0 


Polk 


81 


13 


10 


5 


2 


1 


112 


79.8 


50.0 


Rutherford 


627 


46 


50 


% 


103 


141 


1,063 


255.7 


52.0 


Transylvania 


146 


27 


20 


26 


15 


8 


242 


136.6 


59.0 


District Totals 


1,746 


181 


180 


253 


181 


163 


2,704 


163.4 


50.0 


% of Total 


64.6% 


6.7% 


6.7% 


9.4% 


6.7% 


6.0% 


100.0% 







254 



AGES OF PENDING CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Pending June 30, 1989 









Ages of Pending Cases (Days) 




Total 
Pending 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 30 




















Cherokee 


187 


9 


19 


20 


12 


28 


275 


191.4 


38.0 


Clay 


23 


2 


4 


2 








31 


56.5 


25.0 


Graham 


51 


2 


2 


1 








56 


38.8 


31.0 


Haywood 


224 


17 


20 


12 





1 


274 


53.2 


25.0 


Jackson 


154 


4 


6 


5 


3 





172 


51.2 


28.0 


Macon 


79 


5 


11 


2 








97 


50.5 


38.0 


Swain 


72 


6 


1 


7 


1 





87 


54.3 


30.0 


District Totals 


790 


45 


63 


49 


16 


29 


992 


90.3 


30.0 


% of Total 


79.6% 


4.5% 


6.4% 


4.9% 


1.6% 


2.9% 


100.0% 






State Totals 


70,921 


8,496 


10,258 


14,380 


8,696 


3,114 


115,865 


138.1 


58.0 


% of Total 


61.2% 


7.3% 


8.9% 


12.4% 


7.5% 


2.7% 


100.0% 







255 



AGES OF DISPOSED CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 to June 30, 1989 







Ages of Disposed Cases 1 


Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 1 




















Camden 


217 


3 


3 


1 








224 


28.2 


22.0 


Chowan 


909 


22 


14 


46 


11 


1 


1,003 


40.8 


22.0 


Currituck 


485 


9 


8 


10 


1 





513 


34.0 


23.0 


Dare 


2,494 


68 


72 


136 


5 





2,775 


41.6 


23.0 


Gates 


389 


26 


33 


4 








452 


43.0 


28.0 


Pasquotank 


2,434 


51 


31 


32 


4 





2,552 


30.0 


20.0 


Perquimans 


495 


24 


7 


18 


3 





547 


43.7 


30.0 


District Totals 


7,423 


203 


168 


247 


24 


1 


8,066 


37.2 


22.0 


% of Total 


92.0% 


2.5% 


2.1% 


3.1% 


0.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 2 




















Beaufort 


3,505 


76 


64 


37 


43 


14 


3,739 


33.8 


14.0 


Hyde 


557 


15 


10 





2 





584 


27.1 


17.0 


Martin 


1,287 


36 


13 


63 


97 





1,496 


56.7 


14.0 


Tyrrell 


379 


2 


1 


3 


1 





386 


27.9 


19.0 


Washington 


920 


14 


5 


7 


1 





947 


20.1 


14.0 


District Totals 


6,648 


143 


93 


110 


144 


14 


7,152 


35.9 


14.0 


% of Total 


93.0% 


2.0% 


1.3% 


1.5% 


2.0% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 3 




















Carteret 


4,645 


419 


377 


284 


37 


7 


5,769 


57.5 


34.0 


Craven 


5,628 


451 


532 


314 


45 


9 


6,979 


54.0 


27.0 


Pamlico 


574 


29 


48 


47 


12 





710 


58.8 


30.0 


Pitt 


12,187 


891 


807 


640 


66 





14,591 


51.8 


31.0 


District Totals 


23,034 


1,790 


1,764 


1,285 


160 


16 


28,049 


53.7 


31.0 


% of Total 


82.1% 


6.4% 


6.3% 


4.6% 


0.6% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 4 




















Duplin 


2,632 


228 


166 


61 


9 





3,096 


47.0 


32.0 


Jones 


474 


20 


33 


3 








530 


37.8 


24.0 


Onslow 


10,550 


581 


440 


223 


19 





11,813 


35.9 


20.0 


Sampson 


3,253 


249 


180 


102 


1 





3,785 


47.2 


31.0 


District Totals 


16,909 


1,078 


819 


389 


29 





19,224 


40.0 


25.0 


% of Total 


88.0% 


5.6% 


4.3% 


2.0% 


0.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 5 




















New Hanover 


13,484 


707 


501 


483 


193 


57 


15,425 


49.5 


27.0 


Pender 


1,479 


136 


85 


64 


32 


2 


1,798 


55.7 


29.0 


District Totals 


14,963 


843 


586 


547 


225 


59 


17,223 


50.1 


27.0 


% of Total 


86.9% 


4 9% 


3.4% 


3.2% 


1.3% 


0.3% 


100.0% 







256 



AGES OF DISPOSED CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 to June 30, 1989 







Ages of Disposed Cases (Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 6 




















Bertie 


1,151 


18 


11 


8 








1,188 


25.7 


17.0 


Halifax 


4,682 


254 


209 


114 


68 





5,327 


43.9 


24.0 


Hertford 


2,328 


85 


74 


27 


2 





2,516 


35.1 


22.0 


Northampton 


1,063 


37 


26 


7 


8 





1,141 


29.6 


14.0 


District Totals 


9,224 


394 


320 


156 


78 





10,172 


38.0 


21.0 


% of Total 


90.7% 


3.9% 


3.1% 


1.5% 


0.8% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 7 




















Edgecombe 


5,191 


456 


488 


481 


108 


20 


6,744 


69.7 


39.0 


Nash 


7,199 


734 


951 


741 


93 


16 


9,734 


71.1 


42.0 


Wilson 


4,667 


550 


628 


748 


214 


12 


6,819 


89.7 


52.0 


District Totals 


17,057 


1,740 


2,067 


1,970 


415 


48 


23,297 


76.1 


43.0 


% of Total 


73.2% 


7.5% 


8.9% 


8.5% 


1.8% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 8 




















Greene 


732 


51 


63 


51 


5 





902 


56.3 


29.0 


Lenoir 


3,973 


444 


383 


338 


22 


8 


5,168 


64.6 


41.0 


Wayne 


5,269 


576 


697 


501 


91 


5 


7,139 


70.9 


43.0 


District Totals 


9,974 


1,071 


1,143 


890 


118 


13 


13,209 


67.4 


41.0 


% of Total 


75.5% 


8.1% 


8.7% 


6.7% 


0.9% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 9 




















Franklin 


2,622 


106 


88 


69 


12 





2,897 


38.0 


20.0 


Granville 


2,773 


128 


62 


62 


24 


1 


3,050 


36.3 


19.0 


Person 


1,990 


113 


59 


59 


27 





2,248 


48.2 


29.0 


Vance 


4,766 


188 


177 


99 


16 


3 


5,249 


32.8 


14.0 


Warren 


1,093 


32 


35 


26 


8 


17 


1,211 


49.0 


16.0 


District Totals 


13,244 


567 


421 


315 


87 


21 


14,655 


38.2 


19.0 


% of Total 


90.4% 


3.9% 


2.9% 


2.1% 


0.6% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 10 




















Wake 


26,567 


1,876 


1,929 


2,609 


817 


173 


33,971 


72.9 


34.0 


% of Total 


78.2% 


5.5% 


5.7% 


7.7% 


2.4% 


0.5% 


100.0% 






District 11 




















Harnett 


4,365 


237 


241 


173 


27 


11 


5,054 


48.1 


26.0 


Johnston 


5,131 


363 


413 


218 


22 





6,147 


48.9 


27.0 


Lee 


4,537 


201 


150 


55 


15 





4,958 


35.7 


22.0 


District Totals 


14,033 


801 


804 


446 


64 


11 


16,159 


44.6 


25.0 


% of Total 


86.8% 


5.0% 


5.0% 


2.8% 


0.4% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 12 




















Cumberland 


14,215 


1,559 


1,943 


1,687 


261 


10 


19,675 


72.4 


42.0 


% of Total 


72.2% 


7.9% 


9.9% 


8.6% 


1.3% 


0.1% 


100.0% 







257 



AGES OF DISPOSED CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 
VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 to June 30, 1989 







Ag. 


i% of Dispo; 


»ed Cases (1 


)ays) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


*M-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 13 




















Bladen 


2,518 


116 


63 


43 


9 


1 


2,750 


38.9 


25.0 


Brunswick 


2,956 


175 


159 


115 


46 


6 


3,457 


52.4 


29.0 


Columbus 


3,933 


188 


129 


114 


6 





4,370 


39.1 


24.0 


District Totals 


9,407 


479 


351 


272 


61 


7 


10,577 


43.4 


26.0 


% of Total 


88.9% 


4.5% 


3.3% 


2.6% 


0.6% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 14 




















Durham 


11,654 


1,576 


1,622 


1,269 


653 


1,155 


17,929 


150.3 


55.0 


% of Total 


65.0% 


8.8% 


9.0% 


7.1% 


3.6% 


6.4% 


100.0% 






District 15A 




















Alamance 


7,711 


272 


184 


95 


136 


5 


8,403 


42.4 


26.0 


% of Total 


91.8% 


3.2% 


2.2% 


1.1% 


1.6% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 1SB 




















Chatham 


2,367 


105 


95 


67 


9 


1 


2,644 


39.6 


22.0 


Orange 


4,137 


258 


197 


203 


57 


2 


4,854 


52.8 


29.0 


District Totals 


6,504 


363 


292 


270 


66 


3 


7,498 


48.1 


27.0 


% of Total 


86.7% 


4.8% 


3.9% 


3.6% 


0.9% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 16A 




















Hoke 


1,752 


142 


125 


78 


19 


10 


2,126 


59.1 


37.0 


Scotland 


3,943 


127 


144 


110 


13 


9 


4,346 


42.8 


19.0 


District Totals 


5,695 


269 


269 


188 


32 


19 


6,472 


48.2 


23.0 


% of Total 


88.0% 


4.2% 


4.2% 


2.9% 


0.5% 


0.3% 


100.0% 






District 16B 




















Robeson 


11,040 


346 


297 


171 


36 


3 


11,893 


29.2 


14.0 


% of Total 


92.8% 


2.9% 


2.5% 


1.4% 


0.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 17A 




















Caswell 


996 


19 


13 


8 


2 





1,038 


30.0 


22.0 


Rockingham 


5,713 


173 


130 


236 


11 


4 


6,267 


42.4 


27.0 


District Totals 


6,709 


192 


143 


244 


13 


4 


7,305 


40.6 


27.0 


% of Total 


91.8% 


2.6% 


2.0% 


3.3% 


0.2% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 17B 




















Stokes 


1,296 


113 


76 


32 


9 





1,526 


50.3 


35.0 


Surry 


3,267 


291 


193 


111 


2 


1 


3,865 


50.6 


37.0 


District Totals 


4,563 


404 


269 


143 


11 


1 


5,391 


50.5 


36.0 


% of Total 


84.6% 


7.5% 


5.0% 


2.7% 


0.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 18 




















Guilford 


19,435 


3,106 


4,167 


4,934 


1,821 


382 


33,845 


120.7 


70.0 


% of Total 


57.4% 


9.2% 


12.3% 


14.6% 


5.4% 


1.1% 


100.0% 







258 



AGES OF DISPOSED CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 

VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 to June 30, 1989 







Ages of Disposed Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 19A 




















Cabarrus 


5,473 


256 


139 


143 


53 


1 


6,065 


47.1 


30.0 


Rowan 


5,292 


249 


278 


181 


27 


1 


6,028 


45.9 


28.0 


District Totals 


10,765 


505 


417 


324 


80 


2 


12,093 


46.5 


29.0 


% of Total 


89.0% 


4.2% 


3.4% 


2.7% 


0.7% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 19B 




















Montgomery 


2,372 


90 


104 


103 


31 





2,700 


52.1 


32.0 


Randolph 


4,507 


492 


454 


465 


213 


18 


6,149 


84.8 


48.0 


District Totals 


6,879 


582 


558 


568 


244 


18 


8,849 


74.8 


42.0 


% of Total 


77.7% 


6.6% 


6.3% 


6.4% 


2.8% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 20 




















Anson 


1,964 


91 


35 


27 


9 


10 


2,136 


43.3 


27.0 


Moore 


4,344 


133 


79 


56 


15 


1 


4,628 


31.8 


20.0 


Richmond 


3,758 


143 


92 


65 


14 


2 


4,074 


35.3 


21.0 


Stanly 


2,752 


87 


46 


23 


5 





2,913 


32.7 


24.0 


Union 


4,502 


134 


104 


59 


13 


2 


4,814 


31.5 


17.0 


District Totals 


17,320 


588 


356 


230 


56 


15 


18,565 


33.9 


21.0 


% of Total 


93.3% 


3.2% 


1.9% 


1.2% 


0.3% 


0.1% 


100.0% 






District 21 




















Forsyth 


20,869 


339 


268 


450 


704 


113 


22,743 


50.5 


20.0 


% of Total 


91.8% 


1.5% 


1.2% 


2.0% 


3.1% 


0.5% 


100.0% 






District 22 




















Alexander 


1,345 


106 


113 


50 


3 





1,617 


51.3 


34.0 


Davidson 


8,014 


538 


331 


260 


36 


29 


9,208 


51.4 


31.0 


Davie 


1,081 


64 


121 


34 


3 


1 


1,304 


53.2 


37.0 


Iredell 


8,134 


543 


469 


313 


102 


9 


9,570 


55.2 


35.0 


District Totals 


18,574 


1,251 


1,034 


657 


144 


39 


21,699 


53.2 


33.0 


% of Total 


85.6% 


5.8% 


4.8% 


3.0% 


0.7% 


0.2% 


100.0% 






District 23 




















Alleghany 


399 


11 


1 


3 


3 





417 


29.9 


20.0 


Ashe 


754 


9 


20 


15 


16 


6 


820 


43.7 


16.0 


Wilkes 


3,321 


182 


114 


69 


16 





3,702 


38.3 


21.5 


Yadkin 


1,139 


55 


31 


11 


2 





1,238 


33.1 


22.0 


District Totals 


5,613 


257 


166 


98 


37 


6 


6,177 


37.4 


21.0 


% of Total 


90.9% 


4.2% 


2.7% 


1.6% 


0.6% 


0.1% 


100.0% 







259 



AGES OF DISPOSED CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 

VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 to June 30, 1989 







Ages of Disposed Cases (Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 24 




















Avery 


548 


45 


62 


26 


13 


2 


696 


66.7 


37.0 


Madison 


399 


52 


77 


45 


35 


6 


614 


101.6 


53.0 


Mitchell 


501 


40 


41 


15 


15 


6 


618 


73.5 


40.5 


Watauga 


1,757 


176 


154 


173 


44 


2 


2,306 


69.7 


35.0 


Yancey 


340 


27 


37 


32 


8 





444 


69.0 


45.0 


District Totals 


3,545 


340 


371 


291 


115 


16 


4,678 


73.9 


40.0 


% of Total 


75.8% 


7.3% 


7.9% 


6.2% 


2.5% 


0.3% 


100.0% 






District 25 




















Burke 


4,407 


182 


218 


137 


8 


1 


4,953 


40.1 


22.0 


Caldwell 


3,641 


165 


154 


64 


5 





4,029 


38.7 


24.0 


Catawba 


6,403 


402 


287 


405 


23 


1 


7,521 


50.4 


28.0 


District Totals 


14,451 


749 


659 


606 


36 


2 


16,503 


44.4 


25.0 


% of Total 


87.6% 


4.5% 


4.0% 


3.7% 


0.2% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 26 




















Mecklenburg 


35,755 


2,064 


2,051 


3,106 


1,435 


187 


44,598 


70.2 


31.0 


% of Total 


80.2% 


4.6% 


4.6% 


7.0% 


3.2% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






District 27A 




















Gaston 


9,387 


1,548 


1,480 


1,192 


237 


52 


13,896 


90.0 


60.0 


% of Total 


67.6% 


11.1% 


10.7% 


8.6% 


1.7% 


0.4% 


100.0% 






District 27B 




















Cleveland 


4,859 


270 


231 


184 


28 





5,572 


46.5 


28.0 


Lincoln 


3,317 


116 


104 


119 


17 


1 


3,674 


43.9 


27.0 


District Totals 


8,176 


386 


335 


303 


45 


1 


9,246 


45.5 


28.0 


% of Total 


88.4% 


4.2% 


3.6% 


3.3% 


0.5% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 28 




















Buncombe 


13,604 


509 


495 


992 


53 


1 


15,654 


49.3 


27.0 


% of Total 


86.9% 


3.3% 


3.2% 


6.3% 


0.3% 


0.0% 


100.0% 






District 29 




















Henderson 


3,832 


244 


230 


209 


102 


8 


4,625 


61.3 


35.0 


McDowell 


1,714 


108 


111 


70 


15 





2,018 


54.4 


35.0 


Polk 


645 


49 


42 


44 


9 





789 


56.3 


34.0 


Rutherford 


3,554 


197 


170 


105 


35 


3 


4,064 


49.3 


31.0 


Transylvania 


1,368 


100 


90 


39 


69 





1,666 


61.9 


24.0 


District Totals 


11,113 


698 


643 


467 


230 


11 


13,162 


56.3 


32.0 


% of Total 


84.4% 


5.3% 


4.9% 


3.5% 


1.7% 


0.1% 


100.0% 







260 



AGES OF DISPOSED CRIMINAL NON-MOTOR 

VEHICLE CASES IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

Ages of Cases Disposed July 1, 1988 to June 30, 1989 







Ages of Disposed Cases 


(Days) 




Total 
Disposed 


Mean 
Age 


Median 




0-90 


91-120 


121-180 


181-365 


366-730 


>730 


Age 


District 30 




















Cherokee 


1,184 


70 


70 


82 


64 


65 


1,535 


126.8 


49.0 


Clay 


259 


31 


5 


14 


3 





312 


48.2 


27.5 


Graham 


364 


29 


25 


21 


17 


2 


458 


72.5 


38.0 


Haywood 


2,376 


93 


118 


54 


12 


3 


2,656 


40.0 


21.0 


Jackson 


1,004 


40 


35 


20 


3 





1,102 


35.9 


22.5 


Macon 


680 


38 


18 


38 


37 


21 


832 


107.9 


30.0 


Swain 


522 


26 


18 


6 


7 





579 


43.0 


28.0 


District Totals 


6,389 


327 


289 


235 


143 


91 


7,474 


67.4 


29.0 


% of Total 


85.5% 


4.4% 


3.9% 


3.1% 


1.9% 


1.2% 


100.0% 






State Totals 


438,449 


29,215 


28,773 


27,756 


8,810 


2,499 


535,502 


62.4 


30.0 


% of Total 


81.9% 


5.5% 


5.4% 


5.2% 


1.6% 


0.5% 


100.0% 







261 



INFRACTION CASE FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 





July 1, 


1988 -- June 


30, 1989 






Filed 




Dispositions 






Waiver 


Other 


Total Dispositions 


District 1 










Camden 


962 


835 


141 


976 


Chowan 


1,912 


1,674 


221 


1,895 


Currituck 


2,592 


2,059 


171 


2,230 


Dare 


8,452 


6,744 


1,394 


8,138 


Gates 


1,525 


1,238 


313 


1,551 


Pasquotank 


2,244 


1,757 


317 


2,074 


Perquimans 


1,594 


1,383 


239 


1,622 


District Totals 


19,281 


15,690 


2,796 


18,486 


District 2 










Beaufort 


6,434 


4,420 


1,688 


6,108 


Hyde 


1,176 


705 


457 


1,162 


Martin 


3,624 


2,620 


923 


3,543 


Tyrrell 


4,166 


3,006 


734 


3,740 


Washington 


1,347 


826 


458 


1,284 


District Totals 


16,747 


11,577 


4,260 


15,837 


District 3 










Carteret 


7,860 


5,885 


2,135 


8,020 


Craven 


7,931 


5,399 


2,577 


7,976 


Pamlico 


668 


406 


284 


690 


Pitt 


13,909 


7,625 


5,900 


13,525 


District Totals 


30,368 


19,315 


10,8% 


30,211 


District 4 










Duplin 


4,813 


3,270 


1,136 


4,406 


Jones 


1,136 


706 


406 


1,112 


Onslow 


9,282 


6,199 


2,968 


9,167 


Sampson 


6,696 


4,440 


2,034 


6,474 


District Totals 


21,927 


14,615 


6,544 


21,159 


District 5 










New Hanover 


12,069 


6,485 


5,675 


12,160 


Pender 


3,324 


2,130 


1,153 


3,283 


District Totals 


15,393 


8,615 


6,828 


15,443 


District 6 










Bertie 


2,512 


1,815 


698 


2,513 


Halifax 


9,657 


6,365 


2,874 


9,239 


Hertford 


3,222 


2,179 


1,025 


3,204 


Northampton 


3,608 


2,764 


1,082 


3,846 


District Totals 


18,999 


13,123 


5,679 


18,802 



262 



INFRACTION CASE FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Dispositions 



Filed 



District 7 




Edgecombe 


6,240 


Nash 


6,702 


Wilson 


6,232 


District Totals 


19,174 


District 8 




Greene 


1,393 


Lenoir 


6,902 


Wayne 


7,675 


District Totals 


15,970 


District 9 




Franklin 


2,087 


Granville 


3,620 


Person 


2,640 


Vance 


4,818 


Warren 


2,085 


District Totals 


15,250 


District 10 




Wake 


34,842 


District 11 




Harnett 


6,097 


Johnston 


7,257 


Lee 


5,161 


District Totals 


18,515 


District 12 




Cumberland 


28,538 


District 13 




Bladen 


3,541 


Brunswick 


5,407 


Columbus 


4,912 


District Totals 


13,860 


District 14 




Durham 


15,692 


District ISA 




Alamance 


12,318 



Waiver 

4,636 
5,203 
4,957 

14,796 



848 
4,041 
4,549 

9,438 



1,312 
2,416 
1,594 
2,975 
1,452 

9,749 



16,845 



3,645 
4,185 
3,158 

10,988 



17,852 



2,144 
3,010 
2,754 

7,908 



9,605 



7,525 



Other 

1,445 
1,415 
1,285 

4,145 



535 
2,892 
3,123 

6,550 



733 
1,101 

992 
1,384 

645 

4,855 



20,259 



2,344 
2,720 
1,777 

6,841 



10,087 



1,227 
2,839 
1,936 

6,002 



5,284 



4,483 



Total Dispositions 

6,081 
6,618 
6,242 

18,941 



1,383 
6,933 

7,672 

15,988 



2,045 
3,517 
2,586 
4,359 
2,097 

14,604 



37,104 



5,989 
6,905 
4,935 

17,829 



27,939 



3,371 
5,849 
4,690 

13,910 



14,889 



12,008 



263 



INFRACTION CASE FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1,1988 --June 30, 1989 

Dispositions 





Filed 


Waiver 


Other 


Total Dispositions 


District 15B 










Chatham 


5.522 


3,753 


1,795 


5,548 


Orange 


11,102 


6,219 


4,346 


10,565 


District Totals 


16,624 


9,972 


6,141 


16,113 


District 16A 










Hoke 


3,167 


2,374 


756 


3,130 


Scotland 


2,823 


1,963 


794 


2,757 


District Totals 


5,990 


4,337 


1,550 


5,887 


District 16B 










Robeson 


9,910 


7.001 


1,713 


8,714 


District 17A 










Caswell 


1,992 


1,465 


569 


2,034 


Rockingham 


9,332 


6,658 


2,615 


9,273 


District Totals 


11,324 


8,123 


3,184 


11,307 


District 17B 










Stokes 


3,639 


2,209 


1,113 


3,322 


Surry 


5,260 


3,830 


1,407 


5,237 


District Totals 


8,899 


6,039 


2,520 


8,559 


District 18 










Guilford 


57,313 


29,556 


28,230 


57,786 


District 19A 










Cabarrus 


10,538 


7,057 


3,058 


10,115 


Rowan 


9,172 


5,943 


2,833 


8,776 


District Totals 


19,710 


13,000 


5,891 


18,891 


District 19B 










Montgomery 


1,749 


1,115 


538 


1,653 


Randolph 


9,471 


6,127 


3,824 


9,951 


District Totals 


11,220 


7,242 


4,362 


11,604 


District 20 










Anson 


3,163 


1,954 


902 


2,856 


Moore 


6,887 


4,149 


2,138 


6,287 


Richmond 


4,733 


3,248 


1,453 


4,701 


Stanly 


3,114 


2,140 


999 


3,139 


Union 


7,685 


5,502 


2,268 


7,770 


District Totals 


25,582 


16,993 


7,760 


24,753 


District 21 










Forsyth 


24,651 


13,851 


10,724 


24,575 



264 



INFRACTION CASE FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS 

IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 

July 1, 1988 -- June 30, 1989 

Dispositions 



Filed 



District 22 




Alexander 


1,875 


Davidson 


8,648 


Davie 


2,904 


Iredell 


9,995 


District Totals 


23,422 


District 23 




Alleghany 


992 


Ashe 


1,944 


Wilkes 


3,706 


Yadkin 


3,346 


District Totals 


9,988 


District 24 




Avery 


1,825 


Madison 


1,687 


Mitchell 


810 


Watauga 


3,055 


Yancey 


1,136 


District Totals 


8,513 


District 25 




Burke 


7,037 


Caldwell 


4,497 


Catawba 


10,022 


District Totals 


21,556 


District 26 




Mecklenburg 


56,535 


District 27A 




Gaston 


15,222 


District 27B 




Cleveland 


9,025 


Lincoln 


3,316 


District Totals 


12,341 


District 28 




Buncombe 


11,039 



Waiver 

1,143 
5,154 
1,779 
6,404 

14,480 



597 
1,459 
2,477 
2,206 

6,739 



1,298 
1,448 

535 
2,454 

926 

6,661 



4,312 
2,727 
6,545 

13,584 



41,599 



9,824 



6,804 
2,053 

8,857 



9,364 



Other 


Total Dispositions 


843 


1,986 


3,175 


8,329 


1,064 


2.843 


3,691 


10,095 



8,773 



342 

550 

1,132 

1,065 

3,089 



235 
245 
226 
637 
179 

1,522 



2,628 
1,594 
3,638 

7,860 



9,768 



5,156 



2,272 
1,256 

3,528 



1,716 



23,253 



939 
2.009 
3,609 
3,271 

9,828 



1,533 
1,693 
761 
3,091 
1,105 

8,183 



6,940 

4,321 

10,183 

21,444 



51,367 



14,980 



9,076 
3,309 

12,385 



11,080 



265 



INFRACTION CASE FILINGS AND DISPOSITIONS 
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS 





July 1, 


1988 -- June 30, 1989 






Filed 




Dispositions 






Waiver 


Other 


Total Dispositions 


District 29 










Henderson 


5,555 


4,572 


858 


5,430 


McDowell 


3,757 


3,008 


788 


3,796 


Polk 


1,877 


1,489 


294 


1,783 


Rutherford 


3,785 


2,647 


888 


3,535 


Transylvania 


1,305 


1,019 


286 


1,305 


District Totals 


16,279 


12,735 


3,114 


15,849 


District 30 










Cherokee 


3,027 


2,338 


578 


2,916 


Clay 


775 


646 


124 


770 


Graham 


445 


325 


110 


435 


Haywood 


4,303 


3,440 


901 


4,341 


Jackson 


2,261 


1,645 


441 


2,086 


Macon 


2,389 


1,998 


361 


2,359 


Swain 


1,997 


1,647 


341 


1,988 


District Totals 


15,197 


12,039 


2,856 


14,895 


State Totals 


678,189 


439,637 


224,966 


664,603 



266 



STATE LIBRARY OF NORTH CAROLINA 



3 3091 00748 3134 



N.C. Administrative Office of the Courts 

1 ,500 copies of this public document were printed at a cost of $9,143.75, 
or $6.10 per copy.