X/3
C.JL
North Carolina State Library
Raleigh
N.C.
Ooc.
THE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ANNUAL REPORT
OF THE
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS
1971
THE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ANNUAL REPORT
of the
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS
1971
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS
JUSTICE BUILDING
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
BERT M. MONTAGUE FRANK W. BULLOCK, JR.
Director Assistant Director
To The Honorable, The Chief Justice of
The Supreme Court of North Carolina
Submitted herewith is the Sixth Annual Report of the Ad-ministrative
Officer of the Courts. This Report, prepared pur-suant
to G.S. 7A-343, relates to the 1971 calendar year.
Bert M. Montague
Director
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2012 with funding from
LYRASIS Members and Sloan Foundation
http://archive.org/details/annualreportofad1971nort
CONTENTS
Foreword 7
The Appellate Division 9
Justices of the Supreme Court 10
Judges of the Court of Appeals 10
The Superior Court Division 11
Total Cases Added and Disposed of
in the Superior Court 11
Total Cases Pending in the Superior Court 12
Utilization of Scheduled Court 12
Superior Court Civil Dockets 13
Civil Cases Added and Disposed of
in the Superior Court 13
Civil Cases Pending in the Superior Court 14
Distribution of Pending Civil Cases
among the Counties 14
Ten Counties with Largest Civil Dockets 14
Civil Cases Pending, Added, and Disposed of
in the Superior Courts
by Judicial Districts 15
Utilization of Civil Superior Court Terms
by Judicial Districts 19
Superior Court Criminal Dockets 23
Criminal Cases Added and Disposed of
in the Superior Court 25
Criminal Cases Pending in the Superior Court 25
Distribution of Pending Criminal Cases
among the Counties 26
Ten Counties with Largest Criminal Dockets 26
Ten Counties with Largest Percentage
Increase in Criminal Dockets 26
Criminal Cases Pending, Added, and Disposed of
in the Superior Courts
by Judicial Districts 27
Utilization of Criminal Superior Court Terms
by Judicial Districts 35
The District Court Division 39
District Court Civil Dockets 39
Civil Cases Added and Disposed of
in the District Court 40
5
Civil Cases Pending in the District Court 40
Distribution of Pending Civil Cases
among the Counties 41
Ten Counties with Largest Civil Dockets 41
Civil Cases Pending, Added, and Disposed of
in the District Court 42
District Court Criminal Dockets 50
Criminal Cases Added and Disposed of
in the District Court 51
Criminal Cases Pending in the District Court 51
Distribution of Pending Criminal Cases
among the Counties 51
Ten Counties with Largest Criminal Dockets 52
Criminal Cases Pending, Added, and Disposed of
in the District Court 53
Offenses and Conditions Alleged in Juvenile
Petitions and Number of Children
Before Court for First Time 61
Juvenile Proceedings - Adjudicatory Hearings
in the District Court 69
District Court Activity in Motor Vehicle
and Small Claim Cases 76
Days of Court Held at Each Seat
of the District Court 81
Fiscal Operations : 85
Amounts of Fees, Fines and Forfeitures
Collected and Distributed . . ...i. 86
Representation of Indigents 90
Assigned Counsel - Cases and Expenditures 91
Tables
The Courts Commission 95
The Judicial Council 95
Superior Court Judges 96
District Court Judges 97
Solicitors and Assistant Solicitors 99
Public Defenders and Assistant Public Defenders 101
Clerks of the Superior Court 102
6
FOREWORD
Although court reorganization had its beginnings in North
Carolina more than a decade ago, 1971 marks the first year in
which both trial divisions of the General Court of Justice have
operated throughout the State. During the years of transition
since 1966, it has been difficult to generalize about the state of
the courts* dockets since the number of counties within the sys-tem
was changing and as new counties were phased in the dock-ets
reflected an expected period of adjustment. In 1972, it will
be possible for the first time to compare all 100 counties with-out
the skewing effects of transition and adjustment.
This year it is possible to make meaningful comparisons
with respect to the 83 counties where the new system was fully
operational in the calendar years 1969, 1970 and 1971. Accord-ingly,
most of the year to year comparisons in the narrative por-tion
of this report are based upon the 83 counties where the court
structure was constant throughout the period of comparison. Al-though
each of the tables in this report includes case flow data
from all 100 counties, the totals are reported separately for the
83 counties which have been within the system for three years
and the 17 counties that entered the system on December 7, 1970.
The former counties are referred to as "Group I" and the latter
counties are referred to as "Group II."
The variables that produce an "acceptable" or "unaccept-able"
condition of the dockets in any judicial district are multiple
and differ widely from county to county. Responsible officials in
each county and judicial district must analyze the data contain-ed
herein and measure their court's performance against what
appears to be the statewide trend
:
• The number of criminal cases pending in the superior
court is increasing at an alarming rate. In "Group I" coun-ties,
the number pending increased from 9,179 on December
31, 1969, to 15,586 on December 31, 1971, an increase of
69.8% within a two year period.
• Although the state of the civil dockets of the superior
court is improving, the situation cannot be viewed as satis-factory.
At the end of 1971, there were more cases pending
than were disposed of during the year.
• The district court appears to be keeping reasonably
abreast of both its criminal and civil dockets.
It should be remembered that most of the statistics contain-ed
herein are case flow statistics and that none are delay statis-tics.
A case which is pending may be two days old or two years
old. Nevertheless, a large number of cases pending in relation to
either total filings or total dispositions would necessarily indi-cate
a delay problem.
The statistical data in this report has been supplied to the
Administrative Office by clerks of the superior court and chief
district court judges. Their cooperation is gratefully acknowl-edged.
Htf^B
THE APPELLATE DIVISION
The number of opinions filed by the Supreme Court in
1971 was almost double the number filed in 1970, increasing
from 109 to 211. Full opinions were written in 204 cases and 7
opinions were per curiam. Of the total, 132 were criminal and
79 were civil cases. Seventy-four percent (98 opinions) of the
criminal appeals were affirmed and 53% (42 opinions) of the
civil appeals were affirmed. In the remaining cases the Supreme
Court modified the decision from which the appeal was taken.
As reported in the North Carolina Reports, the court disposed
of 143 petitions for certiorari, 13 motions to dismiss and 1 mo-tion
to rehear.
On October 20, 1971, the Supreme Court suspended its gen-eral
referral order of July, 1970, which required direct transfer
without consideration by the Court of Appeals of civil actions
involving a governmental unit and criminal actions involving of-fenses
for which the maximum punishment exceeds ten years.
The court observed that the order would remain suspended un-til
"the work load of this Court and of the Court of Appeals re-quires
further action pursuant to G.S. 7A-31(b) (4)."
The number of opinions filed by the Court of Appeals has
increased annually. Three hundred and ninety-two opinions were
filed in 1968, 536 in 1969, 594 in 1970, and 605 in 1971. The
court determined and disposed of 238 motions and 355 petitions
in 1971. In 1971, 125 cases docketed in the Court of Appeals
were transferred to the Supreme Court pursuant to the order
referred to above.
9
JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT
Chief Justice
William H. Bobbitt
Associate Justices
Carlisle W. Higgins
Susie Sharp
I. Beverly Lake
Joseph Branch
J. Frank Huskins
Dan K. Moore
Emergency Justices
Emery B. Denny
William B. Rodman, Jr.
J. Will Pless, Jr.
JUDGES OF THE COURT OF APPEALS
Chief Judge
Raymond B. Mallard
Hugh B. Campbell
Walter E. Brock
David M. Britt
Naomi E. Morris
Associate Judges
Frank M. Parker
R. A. Hedrick
Earl W. Vaughn
William E. Graham, Jr.
10
THE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
While the state of the civil dockets in the superior court
has improved over 1970, the condition of the criminal dockets
has worsened. In the 83 counties where the district court was
in operation in both 1970 and 1971 the number of criminal cases
pending at the end of the year increased by 28.3% and the
number of civil cases decreased by 9.8%.
Although the congestion in the criminal dockets has re-ceived
considerable notice, the improving state of the civil
dockets should not obscure the fact that there is also room for
much improvement in the disposition of civil cases. This need
is evidenced by the fact that there were more civil cases pend-ing
at the end of 1971 (12,239) than were disposed of during
the year (10,064). In the 83 counties where the district court
has been in operation for the last three years, the number of
civil cases pending at years end exceeded the number of dispo-sitions
in both 1970 and 1971. This situation should be closely
watched and should not be accepted as "normal". At a minimum,
the number of cases pending at the end of the year should be
reduced to a number equal to or below the number of cases dis-posed
of during that year. This conservative goal would still
leave approximately one year's work on the civil dockets of the
superior court.
In the 83 counties, an examination of the combined civil
and criminal dockets reveals that filings increased by 8%, dis-positions
increased by 12.1%, and the number of cases pending
at the end of the year increased by 9.5%.
In all 100 counties, superior court was scheduled for 149
fewer days than in 1970, but there was an increase of 89 days
in the number actually held. The percentage of court utilization
increased from 80.3% to 82.6%.
TOTAL CASES ADDED AND DISPOSED OF
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
January 1, 1967 - December 31, 1971
Added HHrannaBR! Disposed of v////m/»mm//////ma
1/1/67-12/31/67: WHWimMiii imiiiibi 64,722
W&MESagBttBBBBB^MZBBm 65,432
1/1/68-12/31/68: niHii!I minium in 70,115
mm^&mnBBmmmnmmMBtti 82,879
1/1/69-12/31/69: BKHnnH 45,698
V///MM/M/////M//////////M/ZZ2. 54,148
1/1/70-12/31/70: ^bbeuhi 50,590
v//////»/////////////////M////m 48,259
1/1/71-12/31/71 : bbuhmhi 47,389
YM/MMMMMM/MM/m 47,214
I I I I I I I I I
(in thousands) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
11
TOTAL CASES PENDING
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
December 31, 1967 - December 31, 1971
12/31/67
12/31/68
12/31/69
12/31/70
12/31/71
(in thousands) 18 27 36 45
48,495
36,997
28,631
30,971
31,146
UTILIZATION OF SCHEDULED COURT
January 1, 1967 - December 31, 1971
Days Scheduled Days Held Percentage
1/1/67-12/31/67 9,313 7,815 83.9
1/1/68-12/31/68 9,421 8,042 85.4
1/1/69-12/31/69 9,061% 7,118 78.5
1/1/70-12/31/70 8,9401/s 7,178% 80.3
1/1/71-12/31/71 8,792 7,2661/2 82.6
12
SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL DOCKETS
In the 83 counties where the district court was in operation
in both 1970 and 1971, civil filings in the superior court de-creased
from 7,124 to 6,968 or 2.2%, dispositions increased from
6,715 to 8,133 or 21.1%, and the number of cases pending at
the end of the year decreased from 11,836 to 10,671 or 9.8%.
The number of days of court held in the 83 counties de-creased
from 2,406 in 1970 to 2,239 in 1971, a decrease of
6.9%. The percentage of court utilization increased from 72.8%
to 76.4%.
Among all 100 counties, the 10 counties with the largest
civil dockets accounted for 47.3% of the total pending cases.
Sixty-seven counties had 100 or fewer cases pending and only
4 counties had more than 500 cases pending.
The impact of the civil jurisdiction of the district court on
the civil dockets of the superior court continues to be evident.
The above statistics would have been even more encouraging
had the new 17 counties been included in the comparisons, e.g.,
among all 100 counties filings dropped from 13,589 to 8,251, a
decrease of 39.3%.
It is evident that the district court has considerably reduc-ed
the volume of civil filings in the superior court and that no
trend is apparent indicating increased filings in the superior
court. The reduced level of civil activity in the superior court
should provide an opportunity for further reduction of the num-ber
of civil cases pending and greater concentration on the cri-minal
dockets of that court.
CIVIL CASES ADDED AND DISPOSED OF
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
January 1, 1967 - December 31, 1971
Added mmmmmmsm^m Disposed of •///////////////////////////////<
1/1/67-12/31/67: HmBBB 31,481
Y/r///////MM/ffffffff/ff///////////t 33,602
1/1/68-12/31/68 : n^HHHn 33,020
vgmwmmnBBmBmMBmBBmA 45,848
1/1/69-12/31/69: w—m 11,880
WBBB^Wmm 20,692
1/1/70-12/31/70: wmmmm 13,589
wzzzmmm 15,535
1/1/71-12/31/71: 8,251
WM/MMA 10,064
(in thousands) 10 20 30 40 50
13
CIVIL CASES PENDING
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
December 31, 1967 - December 31, 1971
12/31/67
12/31/68
12/31/69
12/31/70
12/31/71
I
(in thousands)
36,592
24,793
15,991
14,052
12,239
16 24 32 40
DISTRIBUTION OF PENDING CIVIL CASES
AMONG THE COUNTIES
Number of
Cases
Number of
Counties
1970
1971
Less than
50
50-100 101-200 201-500 Over
500
37 22 25 9 7
46 21 19 10 4
TEN COUNTIES WITH LARGEST CIVIL DOCKETS
County
Pending
1-1-71 Added Disposed of
Pending:
12-31-71
Percent
of Filings
Disposed of
Mecklenburg 2,011 1,124 1,681 1,454 149.6
Wake 637 548 338 847 61.7
Forsyth 590 498 499 589 100.2
Guilford 596 543 552 587 101.7
Buncombe 560 332 455 437 137.0
Durham 534 207 314 427 151.7
Gaston 382 292 255 419 87.3
Harnett 293 187 103 377 55.1
Henderson 194 311 154 351 49.5
Franklin 247 68 18 297 26.5
STATE MEAN 141 83 101 122 122.0
14
CIVIL CASES PENDING, ADDED, AND DISPOSED OF
IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS
BY JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
January 1, 1971 — December 31, 1971
Pending Filed Disposed of Pending Gain or
1/1/71 Jury Judge Other Total 12/31/71 Loss
1ST DISTRICT
Camden 6 12 18 + 12
Chowan 44 12 1 7 9 17 39 — 5
Currituck 17 10 5 5 10 17
Dare 52 17 27 7 34 35 — 17
Gates 22 4 3 4 7 19 — 3
Pasquotank 33 36 2 12 9 23 46 + 13
Perquimans 25 14 1 19 20 19 — 6
TOTAL 199 105 4 54 53 111 193 —
"
6
2ND DISTRICT
Beaufort 63 48 5 13 26 44 67 + 4
Hyde 13 8 2 11 13 8 — 5
Martin 29 25 1 9 16 26 28 — 1
Tyrrell 5 3 3 2 — 3
Washington 20 11 3 2 9 14 17 — 3
TOTAL 130 92 9 26 65 100 122 — 8
3RD DISTRICT
Carteret 125 65 9 41 48 98 92 — 33
Craven 192 124 4 33 84 121 195 + 3
Pamlico 15 8 2 5 7 16 + 1
Pitt 255 99 1 33 200 234 120 — 135
TOTAL 587 296 14 109 337 460 423 — 164
4TH DISTRICT
Duplin 135 27 1 20 12 33 129 — 6
Jones 25 9 1 10 9 20 14 — 11
Onslow 141 63 5 16 24 45 159 + 18
Sampson 114 38 2 20 48 70 82 — 32
TOTAL 415 137 9 66 93 168 384 — 31
5TH DISTRICT
New Hanover 185 110 14 75 48 137 158 — 27
Pender 60 11 2 5 7 64 + 4
TOTAL 245 121 14 77 53 144 222 — 23
6TH DISTRICT
Bertie 48 11 1 20 5 26 33 — 15
Halifax 260 26 4 19 42 65 221 — 39
Hertford 35 21 5 6 10 21 35
Northampton 53 16 2 26 5 33 36 — 17
TOTAL 396 74 12 71 62 145 325 — 71
15
Pendinr Filed Disposed of Pending Gain or
1/1/71 Jurr Judge Other Total 12/31/71 Loss
7TH DISTRICT
Edgecombe 46 41 1 41 23 65 22 24
Nash 132 104 10 53 51 114 122 — 10
Wilson 195 84 4 74 37 115 164 — 31
TOTAL 373 229 15 168 111 294 308 — 65
STH DISTRICT
Greene 29 17 2 3 5 41 4- 12
Lenoir 614 72 92 166 228 486 200 — 414
Wayne 223 127 13 54 50 117 233 + 10
TOTAL 866 216 105 222 281 608 474 — 392
9TH DISTRICT
Franklin 247 68 4 8 6 18 297 + 50
Granville 181 22 3 14 138 155 48 — 133
Person 25 23 17 9 26 22 — 3
Vance 62 71 1 18 34 53 80 + 18
Warren 86 18 1 3 27 31 73 — 13
TOTAL 601 202 9 60 214 283 520 — 81
10TH DISTRICT
Wake 637 548 36 145 157 338 847 + 210
11TH DISTRICT
Harnett
Johnston
Lee
293
164
70
187
94
53
8
12
3
27
28
15
68
60
18
103
100
36
377
158
87
+
+
84
6
17
TOTAL 527 334 23 70 146 239 622 + 95
12TH DISTRICT
Cumberland
Hoke
284
51
196
18
18 59
1
131
45
208
46
272
23
— 12
28
TOTAL 335 214 18 60 176 254 295 — 40
13TH DISTRICT
Bladen
Brunswick
Columbus
49
160
153
17
19
58
7
9
12
14
2
50
23
21
26
44
32
88
22
147
123
— 27
13
30
TOTAL 362 94 28 66 70 164 292 — 70
14TH DISTRICT
Durham 534 207 21 35 258 314 427 107
15TH DISTRICT
Alamance 132 127 8 19 81 108 151 + 19
Chatham 57 26 5 12 18 35 48 — 9
Orange 105 55 4 16 29 49 111 + 6
TOTAL 294 208 17 47 128 192 310 + 16
16
16TH DISTRICT
Pending
1/1/71
Filed
Jury
Disposed of
Judge Other Total
Pending
12/31/71
Gain or
Lom
Robeson
Scotland
91
51
73
17
11
2
31
8
18
13
60
23
104
45
+ 13
6
TOTAL 142 90 13 39 31 83 149 + 7
17TH DISTRICT
Caswell
Rockingham
Stokes
Surry
34
130
88
116
11
104
24
74
13
11
2
70
75
4
6
31
10
76
8
114
85
91
37
120
27
99
+ 3
10
61
17
TOTAL 368 213 24 151 123 298 283 — 85
18TH DISTRICT
Guilford—
Greensboro
High Point
451
145
403
140
43
17
188
88
155
61
386
166
468
119
+ 17
26
TOTAL 596 543 60 276 216 552 587 — 9
19TH DISTRICT
Cabarrus
Montgomery
Randolph
Rowan
114
34
234
302
83
21
101
75
18
1
14
13
55
6
55
26
34
22
64
274
107
29
133
313
90
26
202
64
— 24
8
32
238
TOTAL 684 280 46 142 394 582 382 — 302
20TH DISTRICT
Anson
Moore
Richmond
Stanly
Union
16
77
103
25
62
30
47
46
18
83
1
7
9
3
14
3
16
27
8
29
6
14
28
11
41
10
37
64
22
84
36
87
85
21
61
+
+
20
10
18
4
1
TOTAL 283 224 34 83 100 217 290 + 7
21ST DISTRICT
Forsyth 590 498 75 294 130 499 589 —
22ND DISTRICT
Alexander
Davidson
Davie
IredeU
43
138
26
120
18
135
20
137
5
17
12
10
64
10
45
34
68
3
40
49
149
13
97
12
124
33
160
+
+
31
14
7
40
TOTAL 327 310 34 129 145 308 329 + 2
23RD DISTRICT
Alleghany
Ashe
Wilkes
Yadkin
5
32
144
96
13
17
75
43
2
1
15
7
2
3
55
32
5
34
84
48
9
38
154
87
9
11
65
52
+ 4
21
79
44
TOTAL 277 148 25 92 171 288 137 — 140
17
Pending Filed Disposed of Pending Gain or
1/1/71 Jury Judjre Other Total 12/31/71 Loss
24TH DISTRICT
Avery 10 32 1 4 6 11 31 + 21
Madison 13 23 1 8 10 19 17 + 4
Mitchell 7 26 1 5 4 10 23 + 16
Watauga 19 18 6 12 18 19
Yancey 62 15 1 9 29 39 38 — 24
TOTAL 111 114 4 32 61 97 128 + 17
25TH DISTRICT
Burke 93 84 15 43 13 71 106 + 13
Caldwell 75 85 37 20 57 103 + 28
Catawba 171 91 5 42 133 180 82 — 89
TOTAL 339 260 20 122 166 308 291 — 48
26TH DISTRICT
Mecklenburg 2,011 1,124 57 685 939 1,681 1,454 — 557
27TH DISTRICT
Cleveland 130 156 32 27 99 158 128 — 2
Gaston 382 292 22 109 124 255 419 + 37
Lincoln 38 28 4 12 16 50 + 12
TOTAL 550 476 58 148 223 429 597 + 47
28TH DISTRICT
Buncombe 560 332 41 167 247 455 437 — 123
29TH DISTRICT
Henderson 194 311 8 53 93 154 351 + 157
McDowell 67 16 2 4 45 51 32 — 35
Polk 24 9 2 3 9 14 19 — 5
Rutherford 106 60 12 33 26 71 95 — 11
Transylvania 22 12 2 2 3 7 27 + 5
TOTAL 413 408 26 95 176 297 524 + 111
30TH DISTRICT
Cherokee 24 13 1 3 12 16 21 — 3
Clay 9 1 1 1 2 8 — 1
Graham 18 18 1 7 7 15 21 + 3
Haywood 89 44 3 25 24 52 81 — 8
Jackson 54 19 21 9 30 43 — 11
Macon 73 31 15 6 21 83 + 10
Swain 33 28 12 8 20 41 + 8
TOTAL 300 154 6 83 67 156 298 — 2
Group I 11,836 6,968 687 3,133 4,313 8,133 10,671 —1,165
Per Cent 8.4 38.5 53.1 100%
Group II 2,216 1,283 170 681 1,080 1,931 1,568 — 648
Per Cent 8.8 35.3 55.9 100%
GRAND
TOTAL 14,052 8,251 857 3,814 5,393 10,064 12,239 —1,813
Per Cent 8.5 37.9 53.6 100%
18
UTILIZATION OF CIVIL SUPERIOR COURT TERMS
BY JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
1971 Calendar Year
1ST DISTRICT
Camden
Chowan
Currituck
Dare
Gates
Pasquotank
Perquimans
Days Scheduled
5
5
10
15
5
20
10
Days Held
1
5
7
11
2
iiy2
4
Days Unused
4
34
3
81/2
6
% Used
20.0
100.0
70.0
73.3
40.0
57.5
40.0
TOTAL 70 4VA 28i/
2 59.3
2ND DISTRICT
Beaufort
Hyde
Martin
Tyrrell
Washington
30
15
5
23
8i/
2
3
7
61/2
2
76.6
56.7
60.0
TOTAL 50 34i/
2 151/2 69.0
3RD DISTRICT
Carteret
Craven
Pamlico
Pitt
30
28
6
34
18
21
3y2
26
12
7
21/2
8
60.0
75.0
58.3
76.5
TOTAL 98 68i/
2 291/2 69.9
4TH DISTRICT
Duplin
Jones
Onslow
Sampson
20
10
25
20
WI/2
7
13%
14
5i/
2
3
11%
6
72.5
70.0
54.0
70.0
TOTAL 75 49 26 65.3
5TH DISTRICT
New Hanover
Pender
89
10
67i/
2
2
211/2
8
75.8
20.0
TOTAL 99 691/2 291/2 70.2
6TH DISTRICT
Bertie
Halifax
Hertford
Northampton
17
25
16
15
6
141/2
IOI/2
7
11
IO1/2
51/2
8
35.3
58.0
65.6
46.7
TOTAL 73 38 35 52.1
7TH DISTRICT
Edgecombe
Nash
Wilson
TOTAL
30
44
38
112
15
211/2
26
621/2
15
22i/
2
12
49i/2
50.0
48.9
68.4
55.8
19
8TH DISTRICT
Days Scheduled Days Held Days Unused % Used
Greene
Lenoir
Wayne
7
32
55
2%
23
43%
4%
9
11%
35.7
71.9
79.1
TOTAL 94 69 25 73.4
9TH DISTRICT
Franklin
Granville
Person
Vance
Warren
20
19
15
20
15
15
11
7
15
7
5
8
8
5
8
75.0
57.9
46.7
75.0
46.7
TOTAL 89 55 34 61.8
10TH DISTRICT
Wake 180 168 12 93.3
11TH DISTRICT
Harnett
Johnston
Lee
65
55
23
51
48
14
14
7
9
78.5
87.3
60.9
TOTAL 143 113 30 79.0
12TH DISTRICT
Cumberland
Hoke
66
10
47
4
19
6
71.2
40.0
TOTAL 76 51 25 67.1
13TH DISTRICT
Bladen
Brunswick
Columbus
20
25
49
15%
21%
35
4%
3%
14
77.5
86.0
71.4
TOTAL 94 72 22 76.6
14TH DISTRICT
Durham 90 79 11 87.8
15TH DISTRICT
Alamance
Chatham
Orange
39
19
35
28
Id/a
81%
11
8%
3%
71.8
55.3
90.0
TOTAL 93 70 23 75.3
16TH DISTRICT
Robeson
Scotland
40
15
29
8
11
7
72.5
53.3
TOTAL 55 37 18 67.3
17TH DISTRICT
Caswell
Rockingham
Stokes
Surry
6
44
5
43
2%
38
5
33
3%
6
10
41.7
86.4
100.0
76.7
TOTAL 98 78% 19% 80.1
20
18TH DISTRICT
Days Scheduled Days Held Days Unused % Used
Guilford 256 199 57 77.7
19TH DISTRICT
Cabarrus
Montgomery
Randolph
Rowan
64
10
78
58
30
6
45
31
34
4
33
27
46.9
60.0
57.7
53.4
TOTAL 210 112 98 53.3
20TH DISTRICT
Anson
Moore
Richmond
Stanly
Union
20
20
35
15
25
3
12
22
10
21
17
8
13
5
4
15.0
60.0
62.9
66.7
84.0
TOTAL 115 68 47 59.1
21ST DISTRICT
Forsyth
22ND DISTRICT
196 182 14 92.9
Alexander
Davidson
Davie
Iredell
7
84
10
53
5
66i/
2
42i/
2
2
171/2
6
IOI/2
71.4
79.2
40.0
80.2
TOTAL 154 118 36 76.6
23RD DISTRICT
Alleghany
Ashe
Wilkes
Yadkin
10
5
50
13
3
2
38
7
7
3
12
6
30.0
40.0
76.0
53.8
TOTAL 78 50 28 64.1
24TH DISTRICT
Avery
Madison
Mitchell
Watauga
Yancey
7
21
10
12
15
3
6
8
21/2
IOI/2
7
6
7
64.3
50.0
30.0
50.0
53.3
TOTAL 65 32 33 49.2
25TH DISTRICT
Burke
Caldwell
Catawba
24
40
29
IS*
26i/
2
41/2
7
21/2
81.3
82.5
91.4
TOTAL 93 79 14 84.9
26TH DISTRICT
Mecklenburg 399 375i/
2 231,4 94.1
21
27TH DISTRICT
Days Scheduled Days Held Days Unused % Used
Cleveland
Gaston
Lincoln
48
90
10
38
69i/
2
6
10
4
79.2
77.2
60.0
TOTAL 148 nzy2
34i/
2 76.7
28TH DISTRICT
Buncombe 183 154 29 84.2
29TH DISTRICT
Henderson
McDowell
Polk
Rutherford
Transylvania
30
10
10
30
10
2oy2
4
4
25
5
W2
6
6
5
5
68.3
40.0
40.0
83.3
50.0
TOTAL 90 58% 311/2 65.0
30TH DISTRICT
Cherokee
Clay
Graham
Haywood
Jackson
Macon
Swain
5
2
12
30
12
7
9
41/2
2
7
2oy2
9
6
5
y2
5
91/2
3
1
4
90.0
100.0
58.3
68.3
75.0
85.7
55.6
TOTAL 77 54 23 70.1
Group I 2,930 2,239 691 76.4
Group II 723 512i/
2 2101/2 70.9
GRAND TOTAL 3,653 2,751i/
2 9011/2 75.3
22
SUPERIOR COURT CRIMINAL DOCKETS
In this report last year, concern was expressed about the
state of the superior court criminal dockets. It was observed
that in years prior to 1970 the court had been able to dispose
of approximately the same number of cases that were added
to its docket, with only minor increases in the number of cases
pending at the end of the year. It was concluded that the 1970
statistics indicated a reversal of this trend. The 1971 statistics
bear out this analysis, since dispositions again fell well below
filings.
In the 83 counties where the district court was in opera-tion
in both 1970 and 1971, 32,212 cases were filed in 1971 but
the court was able to dispose of only 28,772. Consequently, the
number of cases pending at the end of the year increased from
12,146 in 1970 to 15,586 in 1971. As compared to 1970, filings
increased by 10.5%, dispositions increased by 9.9% and the
number of cases pending at the end of the year increased by
28.3%. The number of days of court held in these counties in-creased
from 3,564 to 3,844 or 7.9%. The percentage of court
utilization increased from 86.4% to 88.4%.
The percentage increases between 1969 and 1970 and 1970
and 1971 are strikingly similar. In 1970, filings increased by
12.3% and in 1971 by 10.5% ; dispositions in 1970 increased by
1.5% and in 1971 by 9.9% (approximately 30 additional assist-ant
solicitors were at work during the last several months of
the year) ; in 1970, the number pending at the end of the year
increased by 32.3% and in 1971 by 28.3%?. The rate of dispo-sition
(the percentage of filings which were disposed of) in
1969 was 99.4%, in 1970 it was 89.8% and in 1971, 89.3%.
It is apparent that one of two things must occur in order
to curb the large increases in the numbers of cases pending at
the end of the year: there must be a stabilization or reduction
in the number of filings with dispositions remaining constant
or there must be a significant increase in dispositions. The for-mer
is unlikely to occur, so attention must be devoted to the
latter. Assuming that filings increase by another 10% in 1972,
dispositions must increase by at least 23.1% in order to pre-vent
a further increase in the number of cases pending. To
achieve this, a disposition rate of 100% would be required.
However, if dispositions in 1972 increase by only 10% and fil-ings
again increase by 10%, the number of cases pending at
the end of 1972 will increase by approximately 25%. Under
these conditions, the disposition rate would remain at 89.3%.
Among all 100 counties, the 10 counties with the largest
criminal dockets accounted for 41.2% of the total cases pend-ing
at the end of the year. Fifty-four counties had 100 or few-
er cases pending and 11 counties had more than 500 cases
pending. In 1970, only 7 counties had more than 500 cases
pending.
The conclusions drawn from an analysis of the data from
the entire State cannot be applied indiscriminately to any par-ticular
county. The state of the criminal dockets is dependent
upon a number of variables that may differ widely from coun-ty
to county. Counties may be ranked or compared on the basis
of a number of indicators, e.g., the actual number of filings or
the percentage increase in filings; the actual number of dispo-sitions
or the percentage increase in dispositions; and the ac-tual
number of cases pending at the end of the year or the per-centage
increase in the number of cases pending at the end of
the year. The two charts at the end of this section make the
latter comparisons.
In the order named, Wake, Mecklenburg, Guilford, For-syth
and New Hanover had the largest number of cases filed
in 1971. Among the counties that exceeded the statewide aver-age
for filings, the following counties had the largest percentage
increases in filings between 1970 and 1971: Cleveland (144.7%),
Durham (56.3%), New Hanover (55.1%), Gaston (49.5%), and
Wake (48.7%).
Mecklenburg disposed of the most cases in 1971, followed
in order by Wake, Guilford, Iredell and Cumberland. Among
the counties that exceeded the statewide average for disposi-tions,
the following counties made the most significant increases
over 1970: Craven (158.4%), Randolph (141.0%), Pitt
(107.1%), Rowan (81.3%), and Iredell (57.6%). In three of
these counties, the district court was in its first year of oper-ation.
The largest number of jury trials, 370, was held in Meck-lenburg
in 1971 ; Wake held 174, Pitt held 119, Cumberland held
113, and Robeson held 110. As would be expected, Mecklenburg
led the State in the number of days of criminal court held (444)
,
followed by Wake (309), Guilford (209), Cumberland (181),
and Buncombe (177).
24
CRIMINAL CASES ADDED AND DISPOSED OF
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
January 1, 1967 - December 31, 1971
Added
1/1/67-12/31/67
1/1/68-12/31/68
1/1/69-12/31/69
1/1/70-12/31/70
1/1/71-12/31/71
(in thousands)
Disposed of w/;////////;/;/7777777.
I I I I I
10 20 30 40
33,241
31,830
37,095
37,031
33,818
33,456
37,001
32,724
39,138
37,150
CRIMINAL CASES PENDING
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
December 31, 1967 - December 31, 1971
12/31/67
12/31/68
12/31/69
12/31/70
12/31/71
(in thousands) 6
11,903
12,204
12,640
16,919
18,907
12 16 20
25
DISTRIBUTION OF PENDING CRIMINAL CASES
AMONG THE COUNTIES
Number of
Cases
Number of
Counties
1970
1971
Less than
50
50-100 101-200 201-500 Over
500
31 23 20 19 7
28 26 18 17 11
TEN COUNTIES WITH LARGEST CRIMINAL DOCKETS
County
Pending
1-1-71 Added Disposed of
Pending
12-31-71
Percent
of Filings
Disposed of
Wake 947 2,539 1,942 1,544 76.5
New Hanover 305 1,745 1,169 881 67.0
Mecklenburg 874 2,524 2,523 875 100.0
Forsyth 311 1,798 1,263 846 70.2
Cabarrus 770 955 991 734 103.8
Alamance 369 722 458 633 63.4
Guilford 602 1,940 1,940 602 100.0
Rowan 708 594 727 575 122.4
Orange 278 561 289 550 51.5
Buncombe 401 790 643 548 81.4
STATE MEAN 169 391 372 189 94.9
TEN COUNTIES WITH LARGEST PERCENTAGE
INCREASE IN CRIMINAL DOCKETS1
County
Pending
1-1-71 Added Disposed
Pending
12-31-71
Percent
Increase
Percent
of Filings
Disposed of
Durham 43 1,330 998 375 772.1 75.0
New Hanover 305 1,745 1,169 881 288.5 67.0
Forsyth 311 1,798 1,263 846 172.0 70.2
Lenoir 78 669 537 210 169.0 80.3
Orange 278 561 289 550 97.8 51.6
Richmond 155 359 221 293 89.0 61.6
Alamance 369 722 458 633 71.5 63.4
Wake 947 2,539 1,942 1,544 63.0 76.5
Gaston 287 843 683 447 55.7 81.0
Nash 198 705 600 303 53.0 85.1
STATE MEAN 169 391 372 189 11.8 94.9
1—Excluding counties with less than the statewide average of 189 cases pending on
December 31, 1971.
26
c S
cm c4 cm i-< h n
1+ I++ I + +
OOCOOOO t* kO
+ 1+ I
fa o
Qw
O
Pu
c/3
I—
I
Q
B
1
<
U
tfB
*6
o
5i—
i
Q
to c~ IS
C 1
2 *
co 3
£
Q
OS
t* "*• CM U3 tH t*» »H
lO « CO OS ^ ub ^ ,H rH CM
f- CI ^ CO CM ^ <<*» ^HO A iO r-t OS i-l
i-< 3 CD CO lO WW «0
CO 00 CO CM CM CO CM JO
OS 00 CM OS "* 00 <N CM
tHi-I CM 00
r-l »o E- C- CO CO t>
lO t> CO r-t IO IO lO
»H CM CM
lO "^ OS iH OS CO t- 00
t? »H CM t> CO »0 Tf OS
*H »H <N <©
!< 8588*8*3
g V. H " *
t>coco©co to
OS rH CO rH "tf CM
CM
gsjossg.
CM CO t> CO 00
tO iH CO CM CM
COCMiHOOS lO
tOCMOCMi-i CM
rH i-H CO
ostococoo 00
lO 1H1-H OS
COr-lrHOOOO <«*
C^^t tOCM tD t^
CM iH IO
tO00r-l tOO r-l
OS © CM CO
OCOOCMCO
00 CO COCNTf
lO tOCOOOOS iH
OCMlOCMCM S
s §
:!
"la
IS
ISs 0.3 ^J
ctj*q 3 « « eg <u O
27
X) a
Hen
ft —
§ B
1
5 hJ
I I I I I
<NCSt-rH CM tCOS Ui
Ci CMrH tC hH OJ
coScmT©S© eo
++++ + ++ + + 1++ I
cs©rHt> to OOtNON CMCO tJ< rH
00 00 00 00 CM
io<ncoco co CO© OS 05
eo ooos NrH cot- u5 cmiococo ^ 00 OS rH
loosopio r* osio ^* ©T*tt>eoeo ^
05(N^to t* ©cm os ^ubt>*o eo 5
»H COCM t- r-tiH CM CS "*T £
HHWO W
<NCO t*< OS
CO ^ CO © © cmcsco© -t
rHrH CO t-
OS©t- rH ©© OS t>I>l>iO <© ©lO © ©^f © ©CM<N ift
r-t CM CM CO rH
CNO00© OS COrHlXN ^ 8'iCO CM
00 00
©COCM© i-l co^cocq co
s C0<N©
00 rH
0(0N0H0^0H5 tN* s CO CO
r-t OS
©Tj3i0o0o0O0O ejp o
rH rH "V «h
rH©<N<N CO
C01O © t*
C- rHiO © OS
r-t CO C-tH CO
CM COCM 00
103 os
Tf ^T CO
l>rH 00
<N<NC0C0 O lO CO 00 CO eo
> -!
lO"tf CO© r+
COCM © © rHCM CO t*
t>l>CMCM
rHCM iO
COtXNrH CO
CO t> CO 00 es
CO ^T ^f CO
00 00 00 05
rH OOCM
OSCOt^t- «o © CM 00 00 © rH CO
^J* CO CO t— t*
rH IO00 IC
HO rH
rHto r*
00 ©
C^SrH © ©
10 CO ©10
CO
c-oor* 00 t-
CM CM Tp CO CO
10 rf osio eo
<N©C0CN ©
r*©r>io us
rHC-.(NCN **
Eh Eh h hi O O Km »»N >-n , *N
cc 05 Cs g s a h E^ ^H s ^
K) CO CO CO a Nn *s _ N-C « *N
q
q Carteret
Craven
Pamlico
Pitt
TOTAL
q
Duplin
Jones
Onslow
Sampsor
TOTAL 5TH
D
New
Ha
Pender TOTAL 6TH
D
Bertie
Halifax
Hertford
Northair
TOTAL
6 5
C "H
*1
2 • o3
11] J
IS Jl
Jig I
hJj
(III
28
.5 *•»
£2
©»oo to HOC) os
l + l I
O(NO«0O0U5CO
,-«CO ^
OS CM CO 00
CO rH CN
i-t iH
CO CO i-HCO IO cn
coco co OS
to
++I + +++ 1
1
+
+
§328 S <* T*C0 tNCO CD
"T "<T »H CO CO OS
OJ^H,-!,-, CO
5to
CNt-IcO CO
CO IO CD Tj<
rH rH o* IO
owco 00
tOCSOO CN
CO COCO iH
OS 3M 3 tOtO CO
oot>co CO
OSCOt* C*>
to 10 H
00 OS© t-
CMCOTf »0
<N(N »0
COtNiO
«>COCO JH
rHrj< to CN
osoo^ oco t* Nt^OHH CO
CO <N CO CO rH CO
^oo6^co 5 iH HH ^T
OS rH O t> CO CO
cot*-i>t*co t*
i-H rH rH rH t"»
»0 CO OCN IO CO
(NCNCOcNrH t4
CN >
V
»o
1
1
CO e
Tf g
CN 8
rH
im
M
O
.5 5:
rH lOt> CO 000 1-H OI>U5 t*
Tf<t>t^ CO OSE-O r-rHCNrH
tO
t-000 to OCNO CO
COTfTf 1-1
(N00O
rHrH<N
t>OS© CO ococo o rH CO IO CO
to OCO
CNOSCN
rH(N
<NO> l>
ooi>o
Tf CO
"#00<N -^
<N^tor>rH os COHCOOH os
CO CO CO CO rH CO
00HC5(NO
CD rH CO 00 CO
^COCO IOH OS
COOOSCNOO CO (NNH(N OS
^COCSjlOOO 2O00 CO CD
i s a
3 8 ^
is I
1 .a
o
S
-a Sg p
3
1 s
3 i
las
$Z < <
Tf CO CD CO
H-++ +
cm t> co in
rf coco cc
OocHcoOJm
1+ I
CO CM in
CD CD CM
CO "<*
t- os o U9 HHIO O)
+++ +
l>HOQ0
t>COG5 "9
.-1 CO
CO rt t- X
CM CM kft
+++ +
CO coo CI
co co in »-i
CD 1-1 lO CO
mCMO co
(NMH t»
l>Tf 1-4 Hf
CO'
1-KN ^ r-JOlO
CO
corral r< in cm co t>
Tfi-4CM CO
CM CO CO CO ocoio o>
1-trH CM
COCO iH rfW O cm iH cd en
l>CMCO CM
CMOO CM t>^ o a CM N W
t-COlO o CO COCi t»
r-l CO
CDin i-<
rt w Oi COCO
CO OS in
«tf COt-
CD i-l CO CO
r-ICO W CO CM IO
i-4fH CM
t«Hlfl «
»-tiHCM m Tj<,_< ,_( CD
OCMCM rH
TjiCOCM W
CM CO CM CO
OCO ^
CMi-4 CO
CO Oi T}< i-H O CMCi rH CM
O5oo m Tt CO CM CD co m •HrHCM CD CO OHIO Tf
t> 05 CO 05
CD CO rH cp
co m co os 1—4 CMOC5 t-4 005H H t- COrH CO
•H i-l CO Ci -tf i-4 W5
CQOOOi CM 00
tHtH CO
SCM CD O CD
CO i-4 Tf
©TfCO CM
O5C5C0 CM
rH CO
OC5CM »H comic t*
cm m co
§ t-eo OCM S CM i-l CO
coco in
CJi-4 00 oo
P a
T3
C
1 d <=
jag a
Is
Jill
PQCQU H
30
CO
e
CO
9 s * 3
fill e*-*"
t»»o CN
•O CO
1
1
lOCO
CO si
I l+l I
coco
1 +
CO Ol <NCO CN
CO CO CN CO CN
CO-" "<*
l+l I I
1° 00-*00tN CN
co oo co i> co
05CO
35 C0r-»OI> CN l>^CNiO CO
coSS cS
coco o»
I a*S5
pptN ©
COCN lO
K ooo
£ fHr-l
t>oogj OlOOl
CN©II
CO ^ l> r-4 00 s § as
COtHCOO
COiHCOt-fHlO
<N
CO cCoO CcoO oo »o
lOCN^f CO
IS
coo
lOi-i
<N CN
COtN OS
OlCNcTJt- 00
CN
WOOW £•
o>t> too o
-* -*CN CO
OOCONiOrHfOO
0<NCO !
888 COCN O WHO coo
lO-*
lOCOCO
IO00
OiCN25$ coio ^
CN
CNCN
oico
co»-t 5°*8S OW lfl
OCN vM
CNCNOOllOO ©
CN^H IO
rHCN Tp
8_ o co
tNi-t eo
lOCiQOO CN
COr-lOCN 00
*Ht-»-<CN iH ££3 IOH |>
M^rtOl O
lOCOcTi t> 00 ©rH-jCO O
IS
HSi CO CO CO CO ©CNCO"
*T
CN si IS
OCNCOOO
t*n«(NO
t- iot*
CN
1*3 j
CU
2 B*S
H boo S «£
31111
° »
c 8
ooooooo to
iO CO cot- m T*
++++++
rf OCOcNCN i-H
CM t> 0> CO tH CO
CN <-<CNCO m m
m
CO
hQOOt- CM
CO O >-«CO CO
CN CO CO
oo co I-* to m 0)
+ 1 |+'| 1 1 l+l 1 B
9
CO
S
CN|>r-jCO CO
CO rf CO t— CO
<N COt-a
oo co rt t- HHtO(N N
1-H
COOli-H TtCO CO CNmcNO© p CNCNCN»-hCO CN
IOCOH© CN
.-lOOCO^ f-cot>
r-tco »n
^OOCOCTJ Si
CN Tj»
OS^t-COO CO OOHOOOrJ CO
OJCOCNCNr-H O
CT>i-<0>OlcN CN
i-< ^H m
oomojcN 2 *-< a ^r t» co
r-tcN i-H ©
00 I>CTi t^. rH
OOtNCD^H ©
r-lTf i-l CO
CO C^ Ci CO 50 CNCOCNCO CN
© in -*t co m
OOOSCNCOcN t*» COtNcNiHTf rt<
Oi t*CO ,-h 5;
r-1 COH CO
O OJ Oi "? pH C5
I> 00 in CO CD rj"
CNCNCOCNtJ< CO
00 00 00 r-HCO o
Oi <<* i>Tt« t> "t
t> CN iCHCTi C5
co Tf m o m
cot- oo o^ oo
CN <<*
mi>cN Tt o oo
oo THfHcoHoNm -^*
OS 00COCN CM
CN r-i ,-( CO ^<
CN cn in
HHhCD 1ft
CN IOHC0 CN
rH CM
2.g
^-<CNt>©»-i i-i
0H5H^OH^HCCO N»-i O©
05O00H 00
i-hcocn a a
CNCOrH CO CO
incooort o
i-H cn co in co
i-i CN
e~rt in co in op
i-i i-< i-H cn co ©
T3
S,g.ais 2 6
Eh
*N
cc:
fc
v: ^q
J3
fcv,
>>
03 hi
O
fa
©m»-i© in
cn int-Tj< a*
i-lTf t> co
^ o
,2 «J aj cu
t- r-i in Oi cn
COCO^tCN CO
111 I
!!*!
lis s
fl"° 1
il
8B
•II i a
Hki5 < <
32
1
1
C0iOrH©«£> •*?
+ 1 l+l I
00 iC t*- to COtON >
I 1+ I
<No^r ©
Tf to io uj
i-H rH rt
+++ +
hi> o toco r^
lO lOCO io OS
ooto^rr© «5 oi>©ooio co
OOOOWM ©
rH rH iH Ift
t"~ 00 OS ^f
»-tc5tN *d<
rH rH CO
00 1/5© N
CO^O C^
TfrHOO CO co©<n ei
rHrHtN iO
CCOOOOWN W00
!-) T* © "<£
OOiOtN ©
(OTt 00 ©
CO CO CO I>- ©oooo © (NtDH h
N05 iH 8*5
©coi> © t>iOCO © rHOJrH l«
©00<N © C0©rH 9
ll
© rHCO l> ^t rH
CO CO lO © CO rH
© COTfrHOS 05 coHHin csi
t> lOOl to lO N tN^CO^tN oo
CO <NrH©© »"* ^t>^Tjl rH M
oU *>>>H
2J3 2 $ <
o © co ©
rH IOC0 ©
COCO lO fH
©©l> t>
CH0HCN(rNH ^©
rH<NC0 t*
NO lOtO©
M
3 CO
-Q *-<
q Q
3
0)
£
CH
£
00 CO (N CO CO^ t}< tN
rr COIN ift
o
00 ©<N © lO© © U3
rHCM rH Ift
©CO© CO
oo io rp t* CNIOH 05
*«* t> lO ©
tNOOCO 3
OOrJ
I S
-C.S b 6
He
/. a; ii
60.fi
C —
15
if
§ 9
s s
&a_ s
.5 < <
5 *
is
c *>
« V
ft."
a co
CO »OOOCOO CO
t^ NHNU3 0>
+ 1+1 I
OJOOCOIXN
CQr-l CNtH 00
tDOXNCSCO W tHCOCO»H«D (D
CN<fc00*OiO «0 OOCOtHOCO IJ
i-iooeoooco
COO* ^o*
05 t^ Oi lO lO <D t~ s 1 1
1
j
co* l-~ »H £
1 1++I++ + + 1 +
COOW05HCOO tH s »H
1
55
CO rH CO iC) CO <N e* 1-H
CO CO
o
1-4
of u
Ba
B
Nh «© r^o coo ho %
iooo«oo<o^ iH JSoo ^. NH MjTf «?
a w s I
e* oo t> *o q ccooccoo co c°Oooo WJ32««£o> eoo5j c
<NW<NJwOcZrHCO Lwg gogiobr-; !3>io ^>w °iio
HOOHN5DO O Jgrf ® W W t> H N SoS«>goi
N eo
1 I
5 <o
g CO
9
i
^ E*i o o N* •N
Cq 3
^ &H
a £ a
q B q
s 8 55 ^ s &*
2C
->> «
<X> CO lO CO t* iH
iO(NCOCOI> 00 (NH CS t*
OiCNOCMO 05 HTf THOilO 1-t
rH CO
t-CDOXOTf CN
COO0tHO5<N »
tDC01O»Ot> ©
l« O >
r-HD I> r> i-l OS O ?3fc$SSb$C0bO
N • S»S»•S*8»n*g
*OO5t><«t^00lOW e5°^ii C^ ,* 0i
.
«-• CO ^^ *^CN n^
^ <N 05 CO CO CO ^ 00
H CO
ClMOr>HcDW-^Oc^orH>cHo to -
1 3
ii
9 c
p o a
S >J |J 8-9
34
UTILIZATION OF CRIMINAL SUPERIOR COURT TERMS
BY JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
1971 Calendar Year
1ST DISTRICT
Days Scheduled Days Held Days Unused Used
Camden 10 9 1 90.0
Chowan 18 18 100.0
Currituck 10 9 1 90.0
Dare 30 29 1 96.7
Gates 10 7 3 70.0
Pasquotank 40 36y2
3i/
2 91.3
Perquimans 9 7 2 77.8
TOTAL 127 1151/j Hi/2 90.9
2ND DISTRICT
Beaufort 65 63 2 96.9
Hyde 15 12 3 80.0
Martin 20 17 3 85.0
Tyrrell 15 6 9 40.0
Washington 15 12 3 80.0
TOTAL 130 110 20 84.6
3RD DISTRICT
Carteret 45 42y2 21/2 94.4
Craven 105 98y2 6y2 93.8
Pamlico 9 51/2 31/2 61.1
Pitt 115 IO51/2 9i/
2 91.7
TOTAL 274 252 22 92.0
4TH DISTRICT
Duplin 40 30 10 75.0
Jones 12 7 5 58.3
Onslow 64 531/2 101/2 83.6
Sampson 45 36 9 80.0
TOTAL 161 126i/
2
34i/
2 78.6
5TH DISTRICT
New Hanover 118 1041/2 131/2 88.6
Pender 20 18 2 90.0
TOTAL 138 1221/2 151/2 88.8
6TH DISTRICT
Bertie 17 14 3 82.4
Halifax 35 28i/
2 61/2 81.4
Hertford 18 13 5 72.2
Northampton 15 10 5 66.7
TOTAL 85 65i/
2 191/2 77.1
7TH DISTRICT
Edgecombe
Nash
Wilson
TOTAL
40
43
65
148
32
39
56
127
8
4
9
21
80.0
90.7
86.2
85.8
35
8TH DISTRICT
Days Scheduled Daya Held Daya Unused % Uaad
Greene
Lenoir
Wayne
TOTAL
18
70
95
183
14
591/2
891/2
163
4
101/2
51/2
20
77.7
85.0
94.2
89.1
9TH DISTRICT
Franklin
Granville
Person
Vance
Warren
34
25
25
36
20
32
20
20
32
17
2
5
5
4
3
94.1
80.0
80.0
88.9
85.0
TOTAL 140 121 19 86.4
10TH DISTRICT
Wake 310 309 1 99.7
11TH DISTRICT
Harnett 30 29 1 96.7
Johnston 39 36 3 92.3
Lee 25 24 1 96.0
TOTAL 94 89 5 94.7
12TH DISTRICT
Cumberland 213 181 32 85.0
Hoke 17 14 3 82.4
TOTAL 230 195 35 84.8
13TH DISTRICT
Bladen 15 14 1 93.3
Brunswick 15 13 2 86.7
Columbus 42 36 6 85.7
TOTAL 72 63 9 87.5
14TH DISTRICT
Durham 166 152 14 91.6
15TH DISTRICT
Alamance 65 58 7 89.2
Chatham 15 12% 2i/
2 83.3
Orange 49 43% 5% 88.8
TOTAL 129 114 15 88.4
16TH DISTRICT
Robeson 101 95 6 94.1
Scotland 30 27% 2% 91.7
TOTAL 131 122% 8% 93.5
36
17TH DISTRICT
Days Scheduled Days Held Days Unused % Used
Caswell
Rockingham
Stokes
Surry
14
74
15
40
12y2
73
12
33
W2
1
3
7
89.3
98.6
80.0
82.5
TOTAL 143 130i/2 12% 91.3
J8TH DISTRICT
Guilford 258 209 49 81.0
19TH DISTRICT
Cabarrus
Montgomery
Randolph
Rowan
60
25
63
54
50
19
53
42
10
6
10
12
83.3
76.0
84.1
77.8
TOTAL 202 164 38 81.2
20TH DISTRICT
Anson
Moore
Richmond
Stanly
Union
33
35
33
33
25
29
32
31
32
21
4
3
2
1
4
87.9
91.4
93.9
97.0
84.0
TOTAL 159 145 14 91.2
21ST DISTRICT
Forsyth 186 176 10 94.6
22ND DISTRICT
Alexander
Davidson
Davie
Iredell
15
70
15
60
14
59
14
54
1
11
1
6
93.3
84.3
93.3
90.0
TOTAL 160 141 19 88.1
23RD DISTRICT
Alleghany
Ashe
Wilkes
Yadkin
10
15
44
20
5
9
32
i2y2
5
6
12
7i/2
50.0
60.0
72.7
62.5
TOTAL 89 58i/
2
30i/
2 65.7
24TH DISTRICT
Avery
Madison
Mitchell
Watauga
Yancey
8
24
14
13
18
4
22
14
12
11
4
2
1
7
50.0
91.7
100.0
92.3
61.1
TOTAL 77 63 14 81.8
25TH DISTRICT
Burke
Caldwell
Catawba
53
50
74
47V2
50
70
51/2
4
89.6
100.0
94.6
TOTAL 177 167i/
2 912 94.6
37
26TII DISTRICT
Days Scheduled Dmys Held Days Unused % Used
Mecklenburg 466 4431/2 22i/
2 95.2
27TH DISTRICT
Cleveland
Gaston
Lincoln
55
171
29
43
1651/z
241/2
12
51/2
41/2
78.2
96.8
84.5
TOTAL 255 233 22 91.4
28TH DISTRICT
Buncombe 199 177 22 88.9
29TH DISTRICT
Henderson
McDowell
Polk
Rutherford
Transylvania
35
33
10
40
25
30
19
7
34
16
5
14
3
6
9
85.7
57.6
70.0
85.0
64.0
TOTAL 143 106 37 74.1
30TH DISTRICT
Cherokee
Clay
Graham
Haywood
Jackson
Macon
Swain
15
8
8
28
20
17
11
51/2
1%
5
16
12
6i/
2
7
91/2
61/2
3
12
8
ioy2
4
36.7
18.8
62.5
57.1
60.0
38.2
63.6
TOTAL 107 53i/2 531/2 50.0
Group I 4,346 3,844 502 88.4
Group II 793 671 122 84.6
GRAND TOTAL 5,139 4,515 624 87.9
38
THE DISTRICT COURT DIVISION
1971 marks the first year in which the district court sys-tem
has operated in all 100 counties for an entire year. It has
been operational in 22 counties for 5 years and in 61 counties
for 3 years. The system is now reaching maturity, and most of
the statistical measures indicate that this high-volume court
is keeping reasonably abreast of its dockets. Both civil and
criminal dispositions increased over 1970 and there was a re-duction
in the number of civil and criminal cases pending at the
end of 1971 as compared to 1970.
The number of days of civil court held in the 83 counties
increased from 5,885 in 1970 to 6,375 in 1971, or 8.3%. The
number of days of criminal court held was almost identical,
10,670 in 1970 and 10,668 in 1971. District court judges were
assigned to hold court out of their own districts for 178 days
in 1971. In 1970, judges held 237 days of court in judicial dis-tricts
other than their own.
This is the first year that separate statistics have been
compiled on juvenile cases in the district courts. The tables
found on pages 61 and 69 are a departure from the case flow
statistics which appear elsewhere in this report. Since the vol-lume
of juvenile cases is not great and as a matter of law cases
are required to be disposed of speedily, the need for a measure
of "ins and outs" in an effort to examine "backlogs" was not
essential. Instead, the first table presents a picture of the num-bers
and types of offenses and conditions alleged to have been
committed by or to have existed among juveniles during the
year. The second table indicates the number and types of ad-judicatory
hearings held by the court during the year and
whether or not the hearing resulted in further action being
taken by the court.
DISTRICT COURT CIVIL DOCKETS
In the 83 counties where the district court was in operation
in both 1970 and 1971, filings decreased by 3.7%, dispositions
increased by 1.9% and the number of cases pending at the end
of the year decreased by 1.8%. These comparisons are not en-tirely
valid since in 1970 juvenile cases were counted as civil
cases and in 1971 they are reported separately. Had juvenile
cases been included in the civil tabulations, there would have
been a small increase in the number of filings and a larger in-crease
in the number of dispositions.
Among all 100 counties, the 10 counties with the largest
civil dockets accounted for 44.1% of the total civil cases pend-ing.
In the 83 counties, 45 counties had 300 or fewer cases
pending at the end of the year and only 9 counties had more
39
than 1,000 cases pending. The rate of disposition for all 100
counties was 99.9% and many counties were able to dispose of
more cases than were filed.
Small claims continue to account for more than one-half of
the civil filings. Of the 134,837 cases filed in all 100 counties in
1971, 62% were small claims, 14.3% were domestic matters, and
23.7 (
'< were regular civil actions in which a hearing before a
district court judge was requested. Of the 134,583 cases which
were disposed of, 21.5% were handled by a judge without a
jury, a jury was impaneled in 2.3% of the cases, magistrates
disposed of 58.8%, and the remaining 17.4% were disposed of
by other means.
It is interesting to compare the civil dockets of the dis-trict
and superior courts. Juries were impaneled in 857 superior
court cases and in 3,025 district court cases. Superior Court
judges disposed of 3,814 cases without a jury and district court
judges disposed of 28,912 such cases. These figures clearly in-dicate
the role of the district court in reducing the activity on
the civil side of superior court.
CIVIL CASES ADDED AND DISPOSED OF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT i
January 1, 1969 - December 31, 1971
Added ^hibhh Disposed of Tzzzzzzzzzzszzzm
1 a/69-12/31/69: wm—mmaummm 101,099
V///////////////////////////M 93,734
1/1/70-12/31/70: EBBDnHSimnB 121,688
w22^^mEZ2amBzmzs^szmi 115,714
1/1/71-12 31/71: HHHBBDDnnraH 117,124
&EZE2ZZEEZZ2ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ& 117,868
(in thousands) 70 80 90 100 110 120
I I.I I I I
•
CIVIL CASES PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURT^
December 31, 1969 - December 31, 1971
12/31/69
12/31/70
12/31/71
36,082
42,069
41,325
! I I I I !
(in thousands) 10 20 30 40 50
1—Includes the 83 counties where the district court has been operational for three or
mce years. The 17 counties (Alexander, Alleghany, Ashe, Buncombe, Cabarrus, Cas-well,
Davidson, Davie, Iredell, Montgomery,. Randolph, Rockingham, Rowan, Stoker,,
Surry, Wilkes and Yadkin) which were activated in December, 1970, are excluded.
40
DISTRIBUTION OF PENDING CIVIL CASES
AMONG THE COUNTIES 1
Number of
Cases
Number of
Counties
1970
1.971
Less than
100
101-300 301-500 501-1000 Over
1000
23 24 13 12 11
25 20 14 15 9
TEN COUNTIES WITH LARGEST CIVIL DOCKETS
County
Pending:
1-1-71 Added Disposed of
Pending
12-31-71
Percent
of Filings
Disposed of
Guilford 4,243 12,911 13,213 3,941 102.3
Mecklenburg 5,428 14,533 16,036 3,925 110.3
Wake 1,698 8,663 7,538 2,823 87.0
Cumberland 2,101 4,195 3,941 2,355 93.9
Durham 1,500 6,704 6,514 1,690 97.2
Robeson 1,618 2,541 2,488 1,671 97.9
New Hanover 1,574 2,616 2,942 1,248 112.5
Onsiow 1,339 1,950 2,100 1,189 107.7
Gaston 1,002 3,647 3,571 1,078 97.9
Surry 370 2,124 1,443 1,051 67.9
STATE MEAN 473 1,348 1,346 475 99.9
1—Includes the 83 counties where the district court has been operational for th:ee or
more years. The 17 counties (Alexander, Alleghany, Ashe, Buncombe, Cabarrus, Cas-well,
Davidson, Davie, Iredell, Montgomery, Randolph, Rockingham, Rowan. Stokes,
Surry, Wilkes and Yadkin) which were activated in December, 1970, are excluded.
41
tt tf OiOifi^OlOW CM CNiOOOCOp
CO Tt i-HCN
^t coco ©t» rHCO CNCN
•
»-• "^ rH CC CC
++I l+l 1 + 1 1 I++
CN HH
1 I++I I
(V K ©t^iOOOCNC^USCN lO CD © 00 © t> ©C5CNi-HrH
C
I
Ill c «o co^r-i^-Oiasioc^ i-i r-l t^ 00 o CDI> iO© OJ
%
<* CO rH CO CO I> ©00
rH J
u «M
©
3
COCO *OCN©©TtCN cooco© cNr^ ©<N©CN© .£
OOlCDOCDOt^OO t£ Ttl>lOt>©
00 CO CNOO
© locooo© pS
o CNCNtNCOCNCNi-H> ©Tt rH©©^ tk H H rH «N rH TH rHCO V b J3
5 h © t» © -t rH r> oo © CO Tt rH CN CO i-4 r-4 00
©CN©Tt<tN© ©00 rH O0© di
IO i-H 00 rH CN t* 00 00 CO Tt 10 £* O »H N HN rHTt CN© CJ QO ^ o 4 CM
S^ i
i
2 © © T* |> tO CO lO CN
CO rH CO CN CN tH Tt CO
rH CN CN CN CN O i-4 CSJ
r-T eC
£t^t-rHCO© irjcNiOTt «©
CNCNt>00©
©10 ©©
rH Of
KM rH 2
1
co
6
CO
rO
1
*
1
cn © i-i t» co co © 5! CNrHTt rHCO sj
-^©©IC-HCO ©rH lO CO©
Tt ©CNTt©
rHCO CO© iS
«2 & 1
55h Q 9 CNrH^-i^OOtNg
?3 8 0tt, S l>rHIOI>©
CNIO © ?£
1
rH
X 01
22^
tt
.2 OS
3o
© CN lO I> CO l> Tt 1> U5I>00<N lOt* ©©©CN© 1
B« rH r-H©<NO0I>CDt>^
CN © CN CN CN CN rH t*
©T^CN^t 00©
CT5 CO CN©
I©> rHCO ©CO CN rH 00 © 8 ££ *H r-T tN rH r^ y-*e6 i
«:«: h
s
a t Tt CN©CN©rH-<t © CO t* CO CO 10 ^t Tt lOOO©© .2 5 9
1
5O
18
CN rH CN CN lO i-H H< rH CO lOrH t*COCO©rH g CN
2
!
t-h rH CO
CN O »0 CO C- C75 Tf< ©
rH rHCO COtHCN
rH CN
CO CO 00 rH 00©
00 © rH©
rH CO CO ©
C-Tf 00 I>©
©CN ©© rHCO CO©
I
1
— —
B tH tN rH CO u ^
&
i
1
Q^ = •
i £H ©©©aTot©©CTNt©tI>>rt©t«>«
COI>Tt OOCNt*- © CO C5 CO rH©
iOI>COC*CN
CO m©CNrH 1
a ll CN rH rH CN CN © rH »H CO "^ CN© COm i-HrH
cog tN rH rH CN i
1/2 3 s H CNOOlOCOOOCOlfjt* CO©Tf©CO t*» ©»0©rH« a
02
<<
cNcom©©©©© WHCMHOCO
CN CN US
CO rH Ttt> rH ©© IO©
rH ©C
Si
1
>
o
En
CO
2
M 9
III .a 113
En Os
s
CO
X fj
En O
1
CO
Q
co Co t-> CO iS w
UOPhPhH
*1j
111
111
rJ ci
42
CO lO I> IO HCO Ifi
Mill
1* t> COOi 00 t^
—1 «tfOOC5 5*
i-H* 1-T
36H
(CNOCOH 00CDOH ©
©
lOiOOO© f» CO^OOlO cm
f-« i-<CM ©
2
i
«Ooio^mHeNo ^© © CO© ©
s W CO"
fi
a
-»
*
©00 ^tf CM CO
CO CO 00 i-l t>
CO U5(N H
1-T
CD©C0°3 t>
CO CO ©
CO CO
1 1 I
00H C5
CM CM *"
(N05H ^ 00 CO ©io ifi
of CO"
©© ©
co oo i-i
^05
iOrf<
CM CO
CM CO
COOlO HtH
OO ic co Tf »0
iC CM t-hCO ©
I I 1+ I
LO CJ5 t> CO "^ O 00 Oi CN i-i
i-i CO ON CM ©
CO © CO JC © ©cooocm 3
i-T cm"
j>cdco io
I ID © "* OS
3 lOCO© iH
CNlO<N«-< CM
t~lO©00 ©
©i>cm© r-
CrOlCMNiHO'Ht j* CO
© CM CM o CO CO ©
+ | + +
CHOOOHiOC5CM CDlOrH CM H rHCM IO*
oo oo oo rf
CMt>CO <*
i-i»hcn in
CO (N CO 00
<N 05 8> t*
i-T ih co"
©©CM CM
CM CO CM
<NOit> 00
COc©i-« CO
a-
IOtH©CO CM
OOCOLOCO ©
i-ir-lCJ5© CO
t>iOCO©
COt>lOOO
CM©©© ©
r-l lOrH CO
co©oor> f-
C75 IO "W © ©
00 CM© 00
00 Tf OilO © i-Hl>COt- ©
<** COlO ^
a
3 § « a ©
Q ^Oai h
coco CM
i-HCM ">*
of co"
com ih ©OCHM CM t*
t*00 CM 4^ ©
to m
coco ©
!>*0 CM
TtCO 00
lOCO
CO j
J £ p En
CO
43
Tfr>oo 5"
i-i ©io co ©^CO lH
*-T of
;S8$S
CM © 00 OS 00 CM©00 1> ©
CM CO
00lO©fH
CO ^< t> CO
CM CD CM CM
CO ^t CO Oi ©
coi-it-ioo r^
i-I^CO»H ©
Ia
S § a> o O
CTOfI©>CN W i t> N en
CO IO i-l CO o HHW IO
p
©CO© CO .2
rf Tf t> IO I S
CNCSJCN t^ „ <
a) B-
9 '3 co
ooo© | 6 ^< 5 >, CO CO CO "^
1-HCOCM t^ a, -°
5 -8
§ fl) —
i 2
CD CD CO IO
* a
CO CM CD CM CM©CD 00
09
lH i-l CO 8 $ ~ s
h w
o
lOCO I> 00
Tj<t»in ^
CM CO CO ©
•• *. ce
-> —
. oft II OK
** | o
la I
a>
Edgecomb
Nash
Wilson TOTAL
$1 1
c.Sf c
o t- o r»
CM O CO lO
CM CM ©
CO Tf 1-- o> CO lO
r~ t> coco fh r-
CM CM
in CO CD CD ©
CM CO CD S "<* lO ©
LOCO i-t
<N CM
<s
"5 J
<5 +T+ 1 + 1+ I + + + + + + + + 1 + to
CO lO t> lO
t> CO lO th
CO CO CM CO Ci © <MO CO CO Tf in T CM t> CO CM O
CO
CM
CO
CD CO'"* <9
C5 03CD Ifl
lO <* ©
LO CD TH COH lO
iH
1
Cm™
£
rH©TJ< ^
t>CO(N CO
r-l OD ©„ O,
t>f CN Ift
©CM 3* ©
CNCO ,T © t>m
coco-** CO
OrH-^t © rH io© W
iH Of
& CO LOCO "f
3 lOI* ©
CM©© i-l
CO^t CO
co r-i co © co "* ^ lOt> CD LO ©
CO CD ©^rH CM CO
rHr-T CO
io in co icco ©
t- loco ©© co
th <n in
Ci CO CO CO CO iH
CMCO©rt< C- 00 ^Tj<©a>rH 00
©co c^i-icm ©
co loco cm rH in
rH i-l CO
ooowow 00
rH CM
LO^ © l>©CO
©^©00
tHt-T
§
in
CO
3,941
359
4,300
3
0)
TD
CO COLO cwoo
CMtI< i
© CM iH
t> i-l 00
c
CM
©
CO©rH
I>©1>
lO t>LO 1
CO© 00
co-^ t>
rHrH CM
CM
fr-iH
CM CM
©LOr-t
CO COLO HPJH
©©
© i
CDI>CO S£
CM CM CM ^ CM CO © LO ©
u
kg
•«^r
rH CM Tf< t<- © CO LO t*
rH CD CM ©
i-Tcsf "*
THjH«0I0O>i HH
LO l> CO
© LOCM t^
t}<t* CO ©
t* © CO ©
CO CD© ©
i-i co © ©
CO CM t> CM LO© CM t^
CDt> "*
rl cm"
Eh O
g
Ills s
8 Sib b
CD t> LO © tH ©
CM t> tH CO t> rH
t> LOCO tH CM ©
rH CO I> Tp LO © rHHHrHHTjC< OCO CM ©f»
COCD©COCD
Tf< CO rHrHT*
CM 00 00 CO© iH !>CMiOiO© iH
<* rf rH C- CM ©^
rH CO
©cm in cm co in m co t* cm co co
CO CM in "tf CM ©
in
tt£ d
I s
»h <u en
b§
C©0©CD © <* © co coco© ©
rHrH CO"
c©o©co rmf mto
LO I>CM "^<
©CM© OS ©CM© f-r-
t rH CO
cm©© in
r©H©riHtn> ©©
CM
m rt< © ©CM rH
rH co m
44
w on
©COOS
T*t>CM
+++ +
00IMO5
rHCOt>
(N0OU5 IO
OS00t> IO
CM
lOrHCO o>
rH|>|> W
rH H CO
OSCMCO IO
co^tio CO
030 ^
CD 00 rH IO
cm eo
mas eo fc
co 1H0Ht* WCO
++ + +
CO rH CO
to CO 10
H05N CM
c<wco to
i-H IO CO «
CM" «
1O0H00OCO 50 CM
COrHrH «5
CMC0*O ©
'-JiHOO »H
CO CO CM OS
lH>lO>CNO oJO
IO rH CM 00
CO IO 00 COH^H fh ^ ooco 00
co t>
ad
]
i3
++ + ++++ +
1,671
271
1,942
HCDINH O
m h o^ t^
r-T i-T
iu
J5
2,488
604
3,092
CO 00 IO CO OS
CO i-l CD 3; 00
CM CO CO ^T CO
r-T rH co"
.5
"ft
—
•0
rHCO ^*
cS
05 !
CO CM CO CO ^
CM OOCO rH A
r-i CM T?
c
SJ
CM
rHOO -
COCO
HCCCS
CD OS IO
1>CS l>
"* IO
CSOCOrH IO
O-"? r-llC CM CMCDCMO H
H CM"
i-not^co os COCOOCD CO
Tf IH rH t*
ooco CO
CMrHIO 00
l> rHOO «D
Tf rHrH t*» <<*CM t>
OCMCDCO iH
CM rH ^
CM HTf t^
CO COO OS
CD CD rH CO
r^ cm"
coco 10 as HO t> OS
CMt>l> CD
rHOS O
sss
cm" co"
CtO>OHSWH(tNT oI*
CMCOTf rH i-H
r-T <N ^"
8
(NOt* OS
OS CM CO I>
COCOCM "*•
t>oocs 10
rH CO
•<* IOIO ^*
CDlCrH CO
TtrtCO IO
aooso t^
HTJ<(N CO
rHCMCD OS
alii
5h ^i
O O K| *N
0! ft
6i h
co CO
Ki *N
q
1
rO
3
fej a:
K^
^
OlOO w
rHrHCO JO
CO rHCO t*
OOCO CM CO
t>OS^ £ IO rH 00
H«5 h COCO CO
!>CM OS
IO 00 3; CM OS
CM O COO rH
CM CM IO
(NO (N © ^ ©
iH H CO
I I
(nNOoi H'"C
CO CO
O Tf © t- CO ortnoo
CM (M 1-1
+++ I
4-
-< CM ©CM CO
Tf« CD GO CD ©
00 lOO O
91
CM Tf CO CD y-* CM
TT CO CD r-t ijfi H (N -*
I++++ +
3
© ©O© ©
CM CO CD
©CMC-'
©© Tf W i-H FN
CO
1-H
©^in CM
© © w
l>00 ©
O00 ©
t>CM OS
CM CD m o o
CD © OCD CO t»CMCM© ©
00 CO i-l CD ©CMOCM
lO ©Tf
00© t- ooo o © coco m
t* m t> © co
©© ©© ©Tf © CM ©© 3
moo co coo -<*
in rf ai
©"cm" co
CM t> ©
Tf CO t^
cot- ©
i-J of
COCOCDO CM OHHin oo
co cm in t- cm
CM
co © m co co
i-H mco m o»
CO MTf H
s t-HHT)<H
CDrHOf~t>
c^coinco m co
CM
*H i-HOOCOCD Tf
Tf i>cMinm ©
T-ti-H^rH tH ©
in i-i ©
—•co ©
t- Tf IH OO i-i ©Tf ©^
©"co" cm"
CM CM <* ooo in OCO Tf
CM
-*H Ifl m© i-^
cm © ©
i-<«H CM co© rf
«hco »n
©"cm" ©"
co th co in cm
Tf CMCO ©
CM© Tf © CD
CM CO CM © CO
O^CO CM^Tf ©_
cm" i-Tt-h" in
mco oo ©
©t- © © Tf © 1-HCM GO
HOiflTf o
Tf ©t> 1-1
Tf CM© »h
©0t©>©©Tf© ©CM
CM CM t- CO ©
[>Tf COCMTf © rH© »HCM ©
OOCMO© ©
-^ © © o o ©
-h"i-T Tf
©© CiMn0©0 ©© Tf © t> ©
CM tH iH CM ©
o©Tf in© m ©CMOTf © eo
CMrHi-H ©
o©©o© i©-h©CMtm-hiCM>©©
©
in
r-H
§
© | CM o 1
©" 3C
OJ
CM m "3
'I'
in
<|
1-T
I
t-
O c/:
c O o© 0. >> N <v
°
r-T J3 "8
0)
a;
I> 1
"0
CM
CM a
—i © © © t*
00 CM©© Tf
in int- ©
P c
i 2 8
o P illis
©©f-Tf © JH
©HiC-H00W0ONCHM t* t-i
H
o Sj'g.gfc
•S .2
iSlOlS
III
46
ao$<*cog
rH rH
T^CN"*
rH
CM
rH
LHOtCO lO "«* rt> p '-'CO CN
-»J HCO CN
CHOHCOIOM
8
3
C9 + 1 1 1 1 +++ + + 1 1 I++ 1 + + 1 +
is
Ch*»
o© CDt* i-l
in Tf« i-H
1H
oo co mo 3 00 ^ t^ © ^T
CO io
<NtJ< CO (NO •**
t> CN CNCO© 'dj
LO O CO rH
CO ^t rH O
CO CO CO *fl
rH
5o
CNlOrH© Cft
i-T i-4 CO
©co o^o cOo oCO
rHCNrHOO
f4" rH
(N00 LO rHOO >*
lO"^ rH mo CO
r-l rH rH rH <©
CrNH©©C0D tO^
rH rH c\f V
hB
o
5
COCDLOI> "**
CN to ©
COC^CNCN
^CNCDCO §
r~©coco^« co
LOCO HH^< CO
IH
t-OrH 00 rHOCD £•
iH rHCO 00
a
©
2
I rHLO O l>
rHi-HOOO © 00 O 00
lHTj< rH i
o>ooi-Kon< op TMOC0 00CN g
OCDrH CO
^< uor> fc lAOOrH W cd
i iH iH rH CN d
a a
a
«>CO© t~ <D
t>O0CO© ©
CD CO iH
•^ co coo LOCO©©
CM
CM 00 © ^* © M< © T*COCO'<tf CN ^ CNCN00 £J
CN rH 00 «N
CO CN LO rH
11
r»
ft
iH r4
J
8
r-s
Ot>WCO 00 LOTt<© CO
CN rH 3 coo'* oco eo
rH
^ rH CD rH
CNCO t> co o
£
a
o H
rH rH U0 rH 00
rHOO 00 Tf rH
CO 00^ rH Cb 00
rH rH CO*
iO©t-CD 00 ©©<NI> O
CN CN rH CO O,
r-4 fH~
«W>O©H©CiOOCCON ^^ rH rH rH rH rH CO 1,176 1,330 2,203 4,709
O
rH 00 00 CO CO Tl<>XCO <*
t> LO ^
y*
LOt>COCN CO t^oouococN o iOCOtF CN© CO
rHCO LO O 00 rH© 00
rHCO T* ©>
!s
eQ
c©ooor©f ©rH
rH CO Tj<
COOHO ^ cocNt-o fh
rH eo
t>rHt>oor> o COCNCNCOCN iO
FH
CN©-* CO C0rHf> FH
CO LO OJ
tcoc^H in C0©0© CO
rHCO H £»
t-COOrJ*. *
o©t>© ub HTtHO)
COrHOOOCO ^ <<* "tfCOOTf CD (©OQOCHO O00
rH fH rH rH gsf
rHco©© m CO LOCO© CO
CO ^ CN
CN LOrh CN
CO • **
t*CNrH00«D "^
OOt-COrHiO CD
rt-HOQO© OCO fhloo L75
£~ FH yT
O
Oh
q
lexander
avidson
avie
edell OTAL
Sh
1
Oh
Heghany
3he
ilkes
idkin
[)TAL
CH O
>*H
QQ
Avery
Madison Mitchell
Watauga
Yancey
TOTAL
Eh o
2
CH
CO
Burke
Caldwell
Catawba
TOTAL
§1 <PQAh CM «&>< H 5cU^ <N
c
•si:
4s i
•1 I
3 E 3
47
CO jH CO (N o oo t- n<
IC m
++
1
<N lO C- 00 LO i-t 00H rHt> CO
+ I + I + +
COCiOO c^--* CD
CO CD ^ in © OJ
<M ^(N CD
M 00
s l>
~ 00
O ef
2
2
*» o>
•X oo
e« 1-4
|
s Qi
X
pa
°2
9 CD ^ CO
»
-
X
3 o — CO
CO X
n
3e
CO
CO
H m
B CT>
s CT>
g CD
£
il
00
00
S3 © WC 05
*-
Is
00
<M
g< ^1
£- W
Nin«t5-o^o oCO
cSco co*
CMCDrH OS
CO CD CO CN (NCOH t*
t»eow io
rHrHCM Iti
rH<N
coo O
t^OS r-l
Oi 0)
OiOOrH 00
C75 i-( th
Tft> lO CD
CD" CDiO 00
i-Tco* in
©Oi U0 ^< t-HOl CO
OSiWooCcNM aCO
CM CO
©do© o>
C^i-iCO CO
iH«N «
<tf<NW w* cooh \a
rH 99
bo
*-.
cs
S.
CO
«N 73
Clevelan
Gaston
Lincoln TOTAL
S3
48
CD COCN t~CN CO
Tf iot- ,H^ CO m in OO CM CN
CN
in CM CO CM^ 00
t>00"<*io<N CN
iH -H ^
OiCMOcD^ CO
CO ^ r-< CM rH w
CM CO 5^5 r4 iH
Oi r-tOS tD *H CO
J-jCDrHc^Oi JH
CM CM ^
corHOcocrs «o
rHtN rH W»
00 r-i CJi CJ 1> 7f <N^l>05i-H CD
t>r}< r-CO CO
<N
COO CNl> rt< rH oom rHrt m m
<N rH in
CDOi "* O <-' O OOOltNO© »H
rH CO^ CD
-^CNCOcNCM CO
HfHO«D m inr-^t-eN co
rH rHrH m
Ah
"I -B'irf
I
:
- j
»Z OS
J SI
*o St
3 | 5
111
C -, X
•sJ "
X CO GO CM © CM X CN »-i CO H CO
+ + + | |+ | +
LO CN X OS CO t> g~jrw-lcGoO-"*<* OS CO CT}O« C©N
3 9
s §
I +
CO e«
CO CO CO GO C- CO lO CN XXCOXm©CN H
rH xfMHH CO
© CO © lO CO CN «tf **
TfrH fr.lOCNr-1 JH
l> lO *H i-4tO CN © H
OS Tf CO OJ CN O CO CO
iHt-ItH ©
00 lO CM 3J rf CM rH ©
CM 001>l> t> CO
COOOOO^INH CO
»H CM
ssgs
£0 oo iA t>
is lei
3 w
U3 Tf
a
CO «>
° S o
£ X CN l> SO W|>
J> <N <© CN
CN
lO ©
IS o
a
is
CN io
S =3
CO
15 CsO§ssTfsCN§cN§^i|^ BHO^cN^O CSOSO
-I
IS
© io os ^ £r i> co
t»r-l CO^COCN
cn o x cn co as co ©
CN GO COCN CO
co ih x © <» ^t e© ©
co 10 co © cm cn uo CO
CM CN^i-h CO
M 00 H CO
s.gj sa
8 »
N CO H tO
g ^ ©
r-i ^r-l lO © CN
co ©
CO "
A CO
"
°l CN
CO CO
OS © fH 1-1 © ©
B.§8.g Sg
• i
a) «
49 "8
*
a
I™ !
a
s
*
1
O P*
IS 1
§o
•0 Is
_. ** a *"» ll $
•81
3 £
"3
ao 5^ u
O Ph oh CU
p .«j H a)
C
49
DISTRICT COURT CRIMINAL DOCKETS
In the 83 counties where the court was operating in 1970
and 1971, filings increased by 1.2%, dispositions increased by
4.1% and the number of cases pending at the end of the year
decreased by 10%.
Among all 100 counties, the 10 counties with the largest
criminal dockets accounted for 51.2% of the total number of
criminal cases pending. In the 83 counties in both 1970 and
1971, 38 counties had 300 or fewer cases pending. The number
of counties with 1,000 or more cases pending dropped from 18
in 1970 to 16 in 1971. The rate of disposition for all 100 coun-ties
was 100.4%.
The percentage breakdown for the types of cases handled
and the manner of disposition is little changed from 1970. In
1971, 63.1% (593,132) of all criminal cases filed were for vio-lations
of the traffic laws. Other criminal offenses (346,835)
made up the remaining 36.9%. Only 11.4% of the cases dis-posed
of were contested, requiring a full-fledged trial before a
district court judge. A judge or magistrate disposed of 30.1%
upon a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, and 41.3 % were dis-posed
of by a written appearance waiving trial and pleading
guilty before a magistrate or clerk. Preliminary hearings con-stituted
only 1.8% of the criminal docket and the remaining
15.4% of total dispositions were terminated by other means.
Approximately 65% of all motor vehicle filings were disposed of
by waiver.
It is instructive to compare the state of the district and
superior court criminal dockets. Assuming that both courts
maintained the level of dispositions achieved in 1971 (the high-est
in history), and no new cases were filed, it would require
approximately one month for the district court to dispose of its
pending cases. Under the same conditions, it would require
six months for the superior court to clean up its dockets. In
other words, the present number of cases pending in the dis-trict
court represents 8.6% of the total number of dispositions
in 1971, whereas the same figure for the superior court is
50.9%.
Obviously, the state of the district court dockets is good
when compared to the superior court. But the comparison is
not necessary to the conclusion that the district court is able
to stay reasonably abreast of its dockets. There is no standard
that measures what is a "normal" or "proper" number of cases
that should be in process at any one period in time, but 80,906
does not appear unreasonable in the face of a case flow ap-proaching
one million.
50
CRIMINAL CASES ADDED AND DISPOSED OF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT 1
January 1, 1969 - December 31, 1971
Added
1/1/69-12/31/69:
1/1/70-12/31/70:
1/1/71-12/31/71:
(in thousands)
Disposed of V////////////////7777777.
wy///////////////////////////////////////////////,^
I I I I
500 600 700 800
742,373
728,463
793,643
779,422
803,354
811,201
CRIMINAL CASES PENDING IN THE DISTRICT COURT ]
December 31, 1969 - December 31, 1971
12/31/69
12/31/70
12/31/71
(in thousands)
I I I I I I I
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
64,332
78,506
70,659
DISTRIBUTION OF PENDING CRIMINAL CASES
AMONG THE COUNTIES1
Number of
Cases
Number of
Counties
1970
1971
Less than
100
101-300 301-500 501-1000 Over
1000
12 26 11 16 18
13 25 10 19 16
1—Includes the 83 counties where the district court has been operational for three or
more years. The 17 counties (Alexander, Allegrhany, Ashe, Buncombe, Cabarrus, Cas-well,
Davidson, Davie, Iredell, Montgomery, Randolph, Rockingham, Rowan, Stokes.
Surry, Wilkes and Yadkin) which were activated in December, 1970, are excluded.
51
TEN COUNTIES WITH LARGEST CRIMINAL DOCKETS
County
Pending
1-1-71 Added Disposed of
Pending
12-31-71
Percent
of Filings
Disposed of
Guilford 12,134 79,895 82,179 9,850 102.9
Wake 9,991 64,037 65,388 8,640 102.1
Mecklenburg 3,046 81,610 78,343 6,313 96.0
Cumberland 2,692 36,440 35,082 4,050 96.3
Gaston 6,867 29,149 32,035 3,981 109.9
New Hanover 3,012 18,084 19,148 1,948 105.9
Caldwell 1,952 10,714 10,737 1,929 100.2
Buncombe 1,083 24,425 23,843 1,665 97.6
Davidson , 653 13,355 12,369 1,639 92.6
Catawba 1,210 18,706 18,477 1,439 98.8
STATE MEAN 848 9,400 9,439 809 100.4
52
3
J
© 00 1-1 00 CN CO X CO HHWCOCO (0
+++ I+-H- +
0} t>»~
H : ©t> © ©XCN© CM
5
"©1-1
DhC-1
(N rH CO
o "'
a
5
_- *C Tj< rH t* CD CN X O 2
eH
COQCO X CDCD'-tf CO
CD x© to o^to CO ©„
HH »-* i-TrHtN* Of
tf H V
32 1
©©CO©CN©© © i* © Tt< rH C» C- CD ©
V rH CO»-tCNJ iH
5O
1-*
•j h t» rH lO t> "^ CO rH 00
Oh
5 a
e
I
S3 •a a,
gw
CO rH <<* rH lO rH t*
r-4 CM ^
h a Oi eB £
&-«r
iH .3 1 ©& «\ Q £ CO © CO CD ""J1 rH CN © ©
Kg
^H
S
S
*s ©COCN«>©lOrH l>
CO
n
aB
CO X^ ©©rHlO ©
00 t* (N |> H CD r)< W
0) E © CN CO r-l rH rt< f- i-l
P
THrt<NlC-ll> rH CO
QQ 1 ££ 00O00 001OCNH CM
« s l> CN rH CN t^ "tf © «5
dm
I?
l>
©a
iH
iH
«
"3
H
INNH CN ©^
rH
rf CN CN CO 00 m © CO
lO CN lO "£ © CD lO Oi
CD 00 © CD © CD 00 © >»
§
iH rHrHCN* oi*
Be
P
1-9
fee JO rH CD rH I> Tf X CM m
8
s
O'C
l> rH CO CO CN Oi © r*
CD CN lO CN 00 rH f»
of
fc^ u
o u ©rHcO lOrHrHX iH
*o•x? t»HHH|>l>»C CM
1-T t-T r-T ©"
W
3 iH©COTf©©CM ©
O rH X l> © Tf rH CD © rH rH rH ©
J fc~
S R 3 lid
§"fc2j> IetH
c3-3 3 <5 CO 03 CD O
t* X Tf in CN i-i © CN CN
CO ^
I 1+ 1+ I
00 t> rH Tf i-l r- lOHtOHM 00
t* CN t-o^
t>©«> r^
rf lO 00 CD CD i-i o io w co t> f*
CD* W* i-H ^t
o^i-lCD©^ lO
Oi CN CN CO
!-»•»!
O lOCOCNCN CN
CN 00 t>C0© © iOi-i©CN© ©,
CO* CN l>
© iC^J © eJ 00
OiTf"0^0 CO H
00 iH t> CN i-i
CM
©CNCNCNCD CN
r-l 00© CNCD Tf
Tf tHCO t-I CN ©
©©^ © ©
. CD Oi
^ioco^c0i> ©
IO lO r-T w
"*E "^ ©
CDt^CN©^ ©
l>lOt>COt> © ©CNt>rHO0 i-l
CN T-! 10
©©©Tj<iC t^ t^COHHOl X IOCN©CNOO ifl
CO* CO*
53
©
ojioi-©© cjj g<N©COCN©
* i J
m"3 2 fc 2 C
"3 ^
ii
tt h
!
5
IP s
"J ((
S «-S £
j? g «H ^
solo's
Wi „r "o
IMl a
« a 3 S .^
8|Sll
MMht rt
Q o c a
0, 3 ^
C v «-*>
1 If1 i
*> h be c,
S i«l £
i 8 8.SS
n
OQ t- t> r-. OS
ua CM co <* CO
<N CO
+ | ++ +
CN rH iH r- CO O CO
CO T}«
(Nf op: 2
++ +
CN CM
o5 tJ< eCN CO CO t" o CO
CM CO NCO »H
+ 1+1 I
Cm
a: cnj rr r-i <c
t> OS H{« W)
CO to CM CO lO
w* Cm"
CO »-H CD ^H TH
CM CO CM lO CO
00 —i rH 00 ©
*H cm"
cot- lO
Tt O if*
OiCO CM
rH CN
"<* CO© OS CD
OCOCM CD rH
c«- as co oo oo H00 © M »H
co"oo" ic pj
i—i co
© U3 CNrf O rHCOO rH -^ © <N CM t> rH
ao"rH to"©" CM
rH CO
00 lO CO
^Ht O00NCO
ofco" cm"
rH CM
oo to to t^ r* COOSOStH t^
iH © CNCD ih
co"©"co~cm" ©"
5
o
b
"is
— i
ft,
"S
K
CO
N
s
COCO lO CM
©oo 85 ^
cm" xc"
22 3S;
OOCOCDrf ^J
CO CO lO lO 00
TfcMcoio m
CM CO
CM -3< C-O rH
CN coco CO CO
cm" cm" io" r><
M H CC H t>-
Tf CO OS l> 00 ^ Tt »-i t> 00
rH? rH CO"
COCOrHt> ^ oHoico © COCMCO CM
CO" "*
CO©00© ©
OS CMCM U5
CMrH ^
OiCM^CO iH
lOCOCMO OS
iq itf cdio »o
rf io co" co"
lO CO CO"^ CO
OS l>0 t> W5
CM rH CO ©^ Cft
cm" io"i-T os*"
OS CO CO CO CO
CD O CM Tf ^ CO^Tf 00 CN CO
1-7 rH CO
OCT) Cft
CD CO OS
(NO CM
iOt> CM
l> 00
©t> ©
l>00 ©
t^rH Cft wh ©
lO© ^
CM CO rH
(NO CO
CO r-T ^
(NO CM lOO »fl
t>Tjl iH
"t" IO
CO t^CM^ to
CD CO CM lO ©
rHlO<<*CO W
h CM
-t COCO© rH
CM rH CO CM © rH CM
HOI>CO Tf
iHioCM IC ^J»
rH CM WH ©
CM? CO"rH r-T CO"
£-©CMC0 iH
OJCOOCO N
"<* HHOl CO^
Tf rH ©
CO CM CM co m TfCNHO W COOCMrH t*
ox
K.2
IS
00 CD OS t> ©
CN CD OS CM CM
CMCO©"** lO
co"oo" lO rH
rH CO
rHCDOSO ©
CO OS CM 00 CO
CMTf COCO Cn
cm"co" ©" cm"
t^OOt- ^J
OS O t>^f CO
OS^CO^CD IO W
C0"u5 CO" OO"
rH OSt-© t^
CM rHTfCO rH
CO©rHrH CM
rH CM"
g s
cp cu^;
eg S 3.tJ C
t> COCO rH r*»
os t> t> io os
t> CM^lO rH t>
CD"rHio"t>" ©
rH CO
COO lO rH © rH CO CD CO 00
"* -<* ecus ^
CM" ©"CM" iH
tCDOOO 00 00©OCM © CO^ CM^CD^ ©
^ © Tj* ©
oooic<t r^ ^OSCNH t* © OOTji CM
cm" <*
1
C7D H
COCM rH ©rH CM
00" co" ^ rH CM
©rH rH
CO 00 rH
<*«5 co
CO
^ to
©CM r-i
CM lO t^
rHCD ^ ©CM CM^
co" CO
0)
>oa
sift
rS • P
rHCOCOt* -^
CO CD CM rH © HOCOCD v^
co"o"co"cm" ©"
©00 t>oo co
00 CD IO "H* 1ft t>©©© 00
CO" rH r* <D
rHiO©© rH
00 OS CD© r^
CO©CMlO CO
CM"©"CM"rH CM
CO CO 00 rH ©
CHMMCDH©CHM t* t*
§
'-3 rH 5 5* Ch
o CO cu o O
54
u
•l
IS —
62
—
137
4-
268
+
69
UjH
IS Ceo
rH-Hi(lNtO> ©00
Tt T* 00 ©
0|N
"3 t^Hffi N
5
L— 1—1 WJ « _
t> lOm 00
©CNi-l CO oH
oo jh of g
1 Htom ^ C
o i-7 r-7 w4 CO"
^
Is ©©£ OS
— HHH Tji
£ w
£COu5
"3 C— © 00 ^J
cs © © ©
£ iqM CO W
co'ic ^7 eo
"«
V COOOlO ©
S t> oo co 53
COCNi-H CO
n co"eo"tN oo"
«i
6t to o o to
s HOOOO)
•-J 00 00 © CN
K CN »
^ iOt}<I> CO
.s HHN W
e OJ pH rt< "<* H QOgtfg
.
sS co co 3| eo
^* COCO H
o-c
u
t> l> ©^ *q
COCO CO ©1H
o u CN00CO CO O l>© a II rHCOCO 05 S !> lO t> ©" oo"
iH
fc CO © © ^
P4^
0)
a
i S
co oo co H
i—i
I I + +
t^. IC CO iO
00 © CO i-H
io oo in
—I t>(N ©
CNCNCO 00
CO l> w CO
CN tHCN CO"
i-Hi-l CN
t>CDCO CO
t^©i-i 00
cNooiq co,
1-4" i-7 eo"
© ion"
rHCDCN
i-lCN
t*-00CN £-
05CNO CN
•trio o"
HOH N
cot>^t 3 t>coco ©
co"co" oo"
1>00CN l^
05<LDU5 H
cn Tf iq eo
i-7i-7 co"
t-CNCO CN
oo^t* co os
CNCDrf CO
cn i-7cn co"
r-lrH CN
CD Tf i-H 1-H
rf<00CO ©
t>lT3CO CO
"*$* ^ ©
rHOOCN 1H
^flOCO CO ubOrf ©
i-Tt>"oo" r*
HON CO
(NOOO CO »H©t> U5
2 * 2 d
PI Re
Oh5S P
<N t- t-00 © ©
CM © XT
+f+ I I f
© CN CO CM CO ©
i-<co t> m co co
t* CO CN <Ni-i r»
00O5O0 O t> CN mmoo^H ©
o>t*t-©to t*
CO*t> rfto CN "«*
»H 1> CN ©CN 00 n^oootw-c^ o £- CN CN
»-r cn"
00©CN t-rH I*
00 CN© CN lO 00
CN CN ©
8 ©cc-it* r* co© ic-^ ©
©^© iq© cn t^
CNCNCNCN i-7 iH
TM>rHC0 lO ©
lO 00 t> 00 © © ©_t>rH©00 00
i-^CN i-7 to"
l> © iOCO to © COCN U5COH © TtOCOTf CO CN
i-7 eo"
§CNinCNI> ©
loco th t> h-
CN 1-H00 © LO CO
Tj7 U5 rflO CN CN
CN
iCTt<©O0CN ©
eoua to ©,©_ ©
r-7r-7r-7cN r-7 00"
iQOOWtlO t^ 00t>©©t> CN
00^iOCN©lO CO
cnco"co"cn"i-7 ^"
^O5©©C0 CN
I>COCNi-H© lO
Tf©tNCOCN i-*
CN ^"
y > 5 5) * <I
S 5 ?> e ^ r
si r3 ^ 5 3 R
CO
s
3
c
*Iili
ml
55
si
5
o
si
1
'3
O'C
u
— V
C©O iO »-i © CM t^ CO
(NTO O
l+l I
OCM O CM
lO CN t-h 00
oo ^r io fc*
©tO© CO
050(N « TfCO CO 1H
©"co'cd" © ,-ii-l CO
Oi©l> CM »3H O
00 "T© CM
oop© <*
C0t>i-H CM
^llHr-l <0
mow m
OOCOiO © INHoo <N
^(DN CO
*4
t>CM Tf TO OoHio b «Olo ih
rfCOr-T of
CO t> © OS
TOrfOO © CM©00 ©
CD © 00 Tf ©TO IO © CM©CM ©
©"tCoO"©©" ©
©i-H "*?
t>Tj<©
©IOtH 00
to""* to" i-h"
005^ CO
CO 00 © iH CM©© ^
iooTco" r>
eot-H h
HTfOosioOo 53 00
(NH CO
K RG
r> ^
OQ oa
N^
q 42 o J Q
Harnei
Johnst
Lee
TOTA Eh
ujeo 52
CO «
+ 1 +
©CM £*
ON W
go as fc ©Tf w
JO TO®
TO
s
55
t> oo
£*0 w
©^ s <«^© 2£ »0 °°.
©",-T t™1
•>TO £
_J 1—
.
Tt* © "*
lOCM I> ©CM CM
<N CM
© tr- l> ^ io ©
-tf T^ TO
©"to" of
TO TO
•*<iO © ©CO CO ©<N CNJ
©CM s
TOCM „
^tCM «0
TO" CM" JO
CM CM
U3"*©
00 ©CO _
Tf COCO iH
+++ +
IO lO(N CM
CO CDI> t"- qt-ooq
t-h" th cm"
C©O©CMl> CM to S iO ©©^ TO
"" "^ © 00
0©0©©©CMCO©
CMi-iCD ©
^lO© 00
©lOTO CM t>©t> CM
IO ©^O iH
i-TrH CM ©
rHiO© CM ©0t0>©T©f NCO
00©TO t^ OiO© CM ©oco «o
io" io"©" of
5 ©t> t* © t> 00
0* l> »* TH
r-Ti-H CO" t>
^o© © TO©i-H "*
rH CM^©^ CO
TO" TO iff CM"
<O©C0 00 lO^t- ©
© OTO 00
+++ +
t> 1-1 1-1 ©
i-i oo co io ©CM IO ©
TO HCO t*
TMOO>OT0O "W*t
©"^"00" ©
©TfCM cm ©103 © C-lOOO tH
rHOOlC "^ © ©iH
rH CM TO
©©© ©
t> CO to © CMTO© ©^
00" cm" to" to"
tFCMO ©
OOCM l> t^
C0"tHtH ©
© IO© © ©TOCM f-
00 CO CM ©
© © © IO
TO O t> iH
t> TO ©^ ©^
©"rf 00" ©"
i-H CM
©OtWHH©Tff-
OO^CN TO^ CO
lOi-Tco" ©~
TOC5© 00
CO CO © ©
©„W3 t> CM
© TO tJ* ©
1-1 CM 00 iH rH©TH Oi ©CM IO t»
I
En ^H O O -H •«-H
Q^ c^
^H Eh
2 CQ
•*s s £ q
ai
rt A ^
Eh Eh
^ Q to
c3 « S Ss
0-5
c 5
Is
3°
2£
tr
o 1 O
3 5 Be T
TO V
If *
So
8 Ifl
%$*•£
ill I
O go to M * ba
e i?3^ S
C,
s\ '*-
"^ E
. •« cj u **
1 2/ I
I "Is*
V teg g
S it c -
nil
i s s § 2
s .'8 %
3*2 P P
« "3 a d 'S
&<<N
*.5
u
Sp
t-oo © i>© ©
to"** i-<
+ 1 +
coco eg
©CO CM
TfrH CO
oS2§
©^cm eo
t>*CM* ©
SCO CM © t-cor>
m © to
00 CM O
rj< CM l>
©*CM* 00
COW H
rH to l> ©to 03
©"cm" iff
SSB
© 00 CO CO CO
to Tf CM CO CD
CO to CO (N
++++ +
o m cd© o CO 00 00 Tf to
© CO "^
i> o o6
— ^r co t- oo cm cd co ©
I CNrf CD t^COOOH p
l>CM © ^00 ©CD ©
H WIO o ofofwTt* ©*
1-t CM i-H CM
.a S2 in© 1
i©oot> 00 o toCM^ CM
to CM CD to
5 oC CO iH CM O
§J CDI> ga CM 00 CO 00 i-l
'is & 00
eo
^ t> co co ©
CD t-
*|
s
>•
'3 ©CO CM in© in t> eo CM© © co o © © co
fc t> CO CO lO CO^TO©^ TO
O G ^
32 9 ^
O 8 b p
HIOHCO H
CO Hh.
HHOW t* lOCOOH ft
COtJ< to© CM
i-7 cm* ^f
t>©©© CM
COO0©T}< £»
00^CO^i-t© CM,
CM* TO* CO*l>* K iH CM
—©k©m ©oo©© ©55
CD © © © CO
lOHN ©*
OTfCO© Tf
CM^TO© ©^ CO
CM*©"CM"to" t»*
i-l t-co© fc t-C0©i-H 00
i-Hin^H^t cm
S
A
^ he .J
>»3
UK^ H
T i
r>co ©
lO © »o
rHCD ©
g co r»
CO 00 IN
OO* CO* CM
to CM 00
CM i-i TO
©00C©O ©3
©"co" CM*
00CO »H
CO© 5*
t>CM ©
CMTf CO
00 CO CM
CM* CM" to*
CMi-H TO
TO© ©
t>l> Tj<
CNCO ©
*©" oo
s CM
©rH ©
t>CM ©
©© m ©CM ©
r> ih ©^
©"co" ©*
m cm t»
©rf 3 CM CM "* CM© ©
©*l> TO*
rH CM
©in th ^m©m m©
to© SJ
co © TO
t-co H
I> tJ«" CM*
J. a
++++ +
cocooo
t>co
t-co
©00 TJ*
t>CD 4
to ^f CO © CM
oo co i-t© ©
"IC^COfH ©
co* to" cm"i-T i-T
© © t)» CD ©
Tp mm© in 4©CM i-h ©
l>©TfCM iH HTfOH t»
COCM CO ©
CO rH CO CO ©
C©M^t>iCnO ©to ©to
©*CM*©"to" i-T
CM
© t£ co © to
CD to© CM TO
cocoiq^t ©
TO* TO* CM* ©*
l-H rH ^<
C0-0CMO©Hi->l CO t*
CM^CM^©^Tf 00^
CO* to" CM*H CM
to©CM© t-
CPOCOt^ CM
to*i-rc0*C0* rf
CMCMTt<i-l 05 i-HTfCM© to
CM CM to© ©
©*CO*©"t** ©*
CM
a
.- _2
SI
I
I
i i
|| «
J* .*
If *
hi
cot-: s
«.s . •§
» *«» 5
o g o be
w-5 v be
b« oT -o
Sail-
™ a) >> T
og-=
ft 35 "3 £
«t & S o !E
S3-*
ijl i
^ 3 &ft g
fill J
57
•M5 $ a
11
8 c
Sc-ot.
Ic
^ oo n
I++++ +
—tiO t- 00 00 05
Oi CO CO i-H 00 to
<M j-* t> lO 00 UO
rH CO
00 00 CT> CM rH 00
t> lO OCO tJ< rH
00 O^^lO «
Tft>"co"co"co* i-h
CO
UOOOI>COCT> CM
CO rHUO rH CM U0
CD"*0>C-U0 CM
OJ C-COCT) CO CD
rHCM CM 00
oor>t>co-«t CM
>3 oootj< co uo
CO WCD^CfcrH t^
CM* CO* CM* CO" CO* U0*
T* rHTf rHf- f-
0&CT) W00O JH
OS ^ ^^r 00 C0_
?h <n f-T r-T oo"
o «-< t>coco *
cmct> tra ctj t> eo
CM
l><NTf< COCO CJJ
l>CMrHt>Tj< CM
°0'~t 00.
T,
l co *t
Tft> CD*CO"l>" CM
CO
CM CO © OO © fc* 5DHO00H £•
rHOOUOCMUO CM
CM CM CM* CM" CM CM*
LOCOrr M<CO CM hohcoco uo
t- WM rHOO CO
CM TPTfrfrf ©*
CM '-I CM t» CD CO
©r-coc-oo uO
CMOCOtJ* cm
w4 CM*
I- CM 00 00
co t> o
CM© CM CD
Tfco t>m
—• coco t>
O©l©tOt>H^Hf ©fl> lecood) co
CM"cm"co"i-h © rH rH CM
OHTfH »
Tf CO©t> CO
«-H Tj< rH UO «
«H CM" ^f
i>©cocm ^«
CDUO r-t -*
rH cow
U0CMt>CM CO
' ©t>co t*
CM Ci^CO W
CO*rH uo" TJ*
a
t-rHl>© Tj« ©C-© UO CO
Tf uo^ us
<m" CO*
O CO CO o o
Tf 00^t rH I>
t> 00 CO © CO
r-T co" co*
CM CO CO i-t i-l
rH y* CO
OCDt>CM U0
"W CO © ^ ^
CO t-i 00^ lO «
rH*©"CM*O0" CM*
CM
t-CO"^© CO
uo woo cm
cOCMt- CO
liils
58
Hi C|
II 1+ 1
plea
n
wh
trate.
os"
-
.2
00 CM CO CO ©
upon
ffenses,
or
Mag
rH CO CO CD t*-
Tf rH CD
8 t h I
© © uo r-< i*
O©CT^)*CHO CM CO II M "^ ©^ a o
rHCD"CM" © Bfi |
iH -1 1 4i 3
Sh w
CM rH U0 t> U0 gS «M
O0CMCT) t> |> "35 °
CM CO rH CO ja o jj
th" CM*
11 5
•** O cd
CO CM © rH 00 rH rH CO U0 CO 3§^5
rH
and
caa
isdemean
.
7A-273
tbmitted
CO U0t> t> CM .a^ a OlCMOOO th 2 O „
CO Tf CM CM CO 8 sS .a
CM* r-T rf "So h gT3tO I? » 0J69- JJ
o g o &
CO^t © CD U0 ~ V fat ©©j>cm © e fl c
CM CD CN UO t^
rH CM
guilt;
or
n
ment or
a
plea
CMt>uoo rf
CMCOCDOO O *»••
rH CM CO CO r? %! fat ^ ^ oj
rH
ft Stj ?
CMC- l>CTl U0 « » § S 2 OOJUOCM U0 . *s corp© uo oo
rH UO*CM* O*
rH
e
upon
upon
s
7
pleas
nment
ance
w
UOCO^CO 00
CMt>U0O0 CO
cmuoctjoo o
rH CO*
a I |i 1
^ O rt 5 *
C«-rHCOCO C-SSocS
CM S "E ^+» «.
Tj"rH t** •a -S-&0
tried
before
a
tried
before
a
agistrates-'
auth
punishment
cfl
c
cases
in
whi
UOrf rHOO CO
UOCOrt* UO 00
CD t*
1 8S&"E
2 "> 3 s g 08 0) fl C
• O.O.S *»
r« ^-S<J
UH Ss
clud clud
ilty. e
m
clud
Alleg Ashe Wilk
TOT
o cg5 c
ri <N n
<N© TfCM i-H ©
i-ltXN GO -*<
I
J + I + I +
t-CO© CO
00 (N(N ©
+ I + +
Tf o a C5 t-oom »-<
if if
3!^ ©©©© m
^2
CO © © H 3 CM CO T-i ©© rt« TO ^COOO8i 8 CM©
CO"
•- r-tojooeot> oo
© O co iq© co ^ " n i-Tth cor-f oT
5
o
.3 0!
COOi lOrHTf
CMt1<TOTOCM
©Tt«CM©TO ©
©00l>©00 IN
CM TfOQi-H
-©<* t©>c©o©t>T">O* ©CO
CDCOCMCM»-4 ©
t- t-t> cJ
00 CO t> ©
©^t-TT «
©'©"oo" ©* HHH CO
Q Tf © ©
OOi-tOO f- ©©t» ©
r-T 09 ©
Ct-Oin©t*©- ©00 hJjh in
t>cot> t^
o«o cot- © CO 0» ©_
00©© ^
lOlO'-' CM SiH^ CM
i-T^ft*" TO
CMCOtP tH
CM~ i-Tr-T ^t
00 © 00 i-<
CM CO i-< 00
^ooq, cm
hm'w ©"
»-iCO "*
©©© T+ © 00 tT CM .-I©© «
co" f"
©©© cm
©r-< 00 ©
1-ico ©
COTpCM © 00HO5 2 »H©CM ^T
«*"©"<N ©
o©o©t©~- ©op
00 ^f© N
co"cm"cm" ©
CO IO t-H © OOtHCO CN ©©"<* »H
C0"cm" CD
sac
- COrf (NHOO © * ©© ©©T* ©
81
a?
Is
ft***
©©©"«#© © lOTflflCDH CM ©©©©"<* ©
CM*
TO©CMC-CM CM
©T©fC©Olr-HHT©O T©O
1-* ef*-* <o
©Tf lT5»HTt« ©©CM©©
T}< Tf © Tf
t-i-H© ©
CMt>l> ©
©"©"©" ©*
i-li-H »H TO
CM f~© ©
©^©CM Cft
CM*©"©" "rf
©W©M>rH ©f» <N©TJ« t*
©CM© « IOU5H H
t> ©^CM ©
iH,-" C0*
ft * £
a a ec O
s ©© CM
. rf 10 ©
©"©"10" ©
t>co© © £-CM© ©
CM © ©^ rf
^tCN i-T ©*
t-©co ©
1©>©(N©© ©CM
^"JDCO"^
© t-© CM
1>«<N ©.
©" r-a
E*H Eh O
fcN »*H 5 a
E^ En
CO g CO
K( J3 •^
C5 Q
fe 3 &d
En <u h
s UCJ PQ
ill
** ft
111 i
Ifl -
2 si«
211 j
i
1
8Sg
0£ S
59
Tf 00 CD CD Tf LO
t-iOOCO t> LO 00 -^© lo to
ii+f+7
imoHQooimci
CO (Nt«(NH
++I I I++ I | 1
s-s
p-fi
Cm
ft,W
5
o
!|
is
1
(NTfHtDtn 00
LO CD H t}< (M ©
t^COCMl>CO cm ©CO^COCO Tt © O ^T lO CD t>«
H ©CO 00 Tf Ot>
CO CM Tt< LO CM t> CO
(N rH rH i-l CM PH
COLO »-IOO rH a
CM© LO©LO t^
OCNCOrf LO ©
rH CM* "**
t*-COCO©© t^
co © co ^ ^
1-* -< "f
LOCO t> CM© t«-
t> ©CM IOiH 05 00©©CM© 05
cm* cm* cm* 00
t>CDO rf 00 LO ©CO "<*©CO LO
t><N(N00^CD 00
i-Tr-T i-T io*
© CMCMLO i-H
00 |>OCO 00
CO t> iH rH CN
CO LO i-l i-t t> f-
CO "^ CO i-l CO LO
LOCOTf OE- 1-H
CM
COt> COrH © ^
CO 00 i-i i-lOO LO
i-t U3 tJ< CD^t> LO
CM*i-»" co* 00*
oooooot> CO (NLOCDOLO © T^t>o^Tf © «o
Tj*CMi-TcO* CM*
©CMCMCM i-l CO co©©colo © ©CMi-H©i-l LO
i-i CM
g=j 'gl
» LO © LO CO CO CO H KO ihooo5(Nio n oo\pfcBk\O 1 00 O CO o t> H CM o i> o
©*<ncm*i-* lo* h 2 £J 2 ri fH " CO *"< X
LO i-H © tH LO LO CM © cot- eg
•H t-CO^<N CO »2 N ^
cm* K^ 53
^
MOO^WOW t* LOCO
CO »-Ht>CO LO op _J
fH CM t* " $Sco
iH CM
CO*
LO t- f- CO LO "* CO OS OS CD os 00
LO CO CD O LO CO i-H OS CM ^ Sj ^ QOCMCMCDLOOSCOt* © ^ °0 *2
cm w 2» S ^
CM «0
CO
*-l LO © LO t£ i-H CO © LOCOCMLOCOi-H^ ©
CM COCO LO CM© CO © —4 » CO
LO
CM
CM i
CM N
CO
COI>CMt-©00LOCO CO © 3JLO
COTjiCMTfCO©Tj<CO 00 n <*>_*
i-HCMCMt>rt<Tfr-<CO ^S *"t VH
CM* CO*
©*
00 i-<
CMLOTi<i-H>COCO LO 00©© © ©T}< © LO
"fjo t> OS^CO © t"; OS H LO*(N CM*rH T|*
^CD©Tj<©©LO © ©i-lt>© i-l© © iH
LO 1-H Tf ©CM © r-^ TH
i-f*-* iH ©
1-1 © CO t- CO Tf CO LO © 00 i-H © •<* CO LO T}<
00 r? co © i-h ^ © 00 WHH 00*
^ Kp CO o
Ifl fe\ H ^
CO o © ©
co* S ©* °
CO
9 <-•
LO 3
CO cs © LO © ©
LO © © LO "^ t- CM LO CM
as ,-< © co lo lo co 10
i-H rHCOi-ICMi-ICM LO
©
© ©
©
5
CO co
1-1 ©
CO* ©
LO
g9c
TB S p S § s
60
ft c
1°M
•- c;
H c Q
Jo
Oh a,
11
HE
D O • 45
I IE]
C-Ot- §
- a; bt
s c ^* i
1 14« -
a) o S•§
*"
c *
o f- «* ^
S tel ?
||f| 1
U 5
ill
o s
SSJJ
1
B 8Bg!-
I IjJ I
6 C Pi t3
p
<
^ &
* g
% 9
p w
w «
o o
H fe
.J w
»J pq
2§
Hd
o fa
00
k
-a
g
Q
as
P
CO w
CO
H
fa o
It?
ill
y« nlo
§•
Q
«3N CD <* <N iOO «5
r-lrHCO ^T <N CO
Ol iC 00 CO tO H
00 CO r-i CO 00
II
IS
|| t*TJ
©fa
to co h a) h o h co HCQ CO WIN «C
HHHOOCNH «©
fhoooo<no eo
HHOHO05H CO
OHOOO^H «0
HOOHQlflO t*
C* ^ O 00 r-lt> O rH
?H CO CO CO r*' ^
©©<Nr-l©r-<© <«*
CM CM t> LO rH t> »-< K3
rHi-HCO CNH ©
OCNHCNOC5Q0 0*
tH CO
ooooooo ©
*!!• * Its
bjjq p ea « cc qj p
61
l-H M .. S« • O 3
9 «\ |i
CS (6
£5
OlH
** o $£
OOf-CNOO^ <©
4) « fl
Oi lOH"<t H >
CN 1 s
cc to
> *
3*0 o if
§ s c
o MNHO00 00 si 03A
rH rH CO £
c •*>
8S?
"* C
^£ 3'^
COOtNOH «D ^J
- :S
H +j a> *-i -^
Is
«2
lOlOrHCOCN © S o
CM »-i ^ u si
«
e 2 c o
S.S •2 H
J-HintcoH
co > 3
> u
i-i ACSUo£ 2=45
I.E
r^OWMH CO
CN CO
•s « s
M -3 c
oo C 3 3 «« a; <DT3
S C "o o
CO O 00 io © ©
o u 3
c
VO CM i-HCO tN
•""g rt ."3
B ° -eyC
"*t O O O 1-H lO III
III
C c
H 3
'O m cy
"-•"S 2 ^X
Tf O t— CO CO l>
CO CNHN05
5§S
w a)
co V
0) 5
|-3
lOOHCNCO ^
'2'S >>
C c ct) 3 c
•~~z ng
«** 3 ooooo o ll| £S
S.s
53 e a) O ft 6S
S < 9
cCO
c C
£.2 3
gig
° . 4» -*!r'C
— & C*3
£5t3
i ° i
C Bg^g 4, g
o
a «=-srf
S SL3 c.SS
-5 a! 3 *
l-sj
ill
oph cd © © lO I-* lO
»-4^H CO
©iQ^f'C^^ (OH h HiCCOtD « t- r-i Ip COCO «D ^OJNH f.
i-4i-i co ^ "* 11
II
c c
o *> 3 -o
©t-l-t'tf i-l
(NOINPi OS
r-"(N lO 00
10C005D ^ Hr-t CS A
»H t* O t> MS
3Ǥg C^^CO
CO lO CM CM CM
iHCM CO ©
^©t-HCO N
CMCM © *C
OOC^COfO i-i
cho t>rw co <ni-i u5
co© r>oo i-t
iH IC 00
^OOSOO iH ION ©
COOOO^ M5
CM<-I ^?
COW JO
oO^©1
gas
^2^8 s°a
s^s
-^SSS § W S
HOCOCO t»
lOiOCMCM S!
©CO CM CM ©
©lO©© W3
WNOiO CM
CMCM US
CO C— © CO CO
lOCM £• CMlft©CM ©
CO © (NH CO
5o
ii
CO CO tH CO
1-4 CO
28°c$S
CO CO CO© ^J»
TfCO t-ICO iH
CM "*
CM CM CM l> CO
<N CO ©
©©Or-I *H
CO CO 00 CO CO
i-4 CO F- CO
CM©CM©
COCOr-lCM CM
CO COCO 00
S°5'°g
©©«H© iH
s-e8ss„ to t*»
3" 3
8|
t>OI ©
o© ©
CO t^»HCO ©
CNrHCNi-l 00
©l>CMCM *H
NtOCt-OCHN^Ht ©IH
©CMC^© ©
©r-4©© iH
o ^
§•818
'
62
1o
g
0) «<
0) ££ihs
• ail 5
'-X3 ^ -*-> -> f-i
m 03 <D O O
Ill
ill
kCiC fc* t^ Ci 0000
iO<N00 to 10 t>Oi
OXNTf^OO
co m ic
" H-s ssgi
II
<NC0<N N CNOSiO t*
ooow CO ooooo t"
CO<N <©
o>ohho r*
CO<N<£>H "-I 3 i-i i-i CO
co oo io t*
II
§ g
38°8 2^8$ OCOCO^O© 00<hNcto- »£o
COUJCO "*£ ©0*0 W5 ^U3«OCO(N © OJ t« CN O ©
Ofa
cncoh <fe h^o <d
05 ^ 00 tf"-- 0000 «P iO H ^ JO
<NlO00 &
"H^PHOOHH ^CO ^lO^tf H"<tf
ooco^toio a
C35CO^t <© COCiOi £j H H •*• H CO © "** HCO CO ©
""t^T* CO
HHH ^t
O0C5(N « i> 003; coo h HOI CO 00
"JJ
t>ooo ^
H,-| CO
Ss
0>
00h^© CM ecos
<NH to
coco
©HHOCHOH HCO
OHCOOO £ tN 00
•8
^t>oS H CO
H^CMlO CO
OiHco
-* OO
00H© oj CNCNTf on
CNOJ© H HCO iO
C-gO>Cr-to^cCoOco CN "SS33
HO© H ©©CM CN! ©C0©O© CO H HO© ^H
O
CO |
O j5
III
2 * 2 d
Sill
o^ii J
63
|£J
CO os
r-lCC 10 3 [> t- Tf OS
rH CN
2? $Hoe OS © CO 10 cn
t^ rH 00
INH f
2£
5 ^
5 c
TfTf CO o
OS
JOIO I'-
ll
< c
II
E
OSCN rH O tH
00 tH OS
00 oo
CNCO W5
i-l rH CN
<N CN
rHt> oo
CO CO
3 co oo
iCt* OS
co co
rd co Th
CO CO
OS CO OS CO
CCt> rH CO
CN CO
rHCN CO OS
es cn rf
<NO^ CO
CO IOCS §
rH CO CO
co co oo r>
rf CO© rH
rH CN
ooco2 8
CO U0 r-t CN
CO lO OS CO
s
CO OS OS
t^ COxf
Tf rH cc
CNCOI>
t^rHrH ©
COOOiO
CN S
£«CNCN
I>CN<N
rH
CN
rH
tHIOCO os
cot>os
CO rH
CN
CO
CO T-*
8
1*
ThCNCO OS
CO
CNrHt-
COCNt- 1
CNt> OS OOS OS
TFrH IC
COTf O CDrH CO
COCN O
COCN CO
OSrH O
t>CO rH
coco g T^ rH CO
rHkO CO
COrH ^
oso os Hi" '
CN ^2 3
WO W5
COrH ^f
cot> ©
r-H> OS
"- c
Ofc
CO© 00
CO CO
O rH Tj< IC cS°8 8 rHCO ^ t>^ rH
O »H OOO O ooo ©
&H o
s
CO
eg
C
CU
-8*
Er*
I o
558 g
§
r3M
P
ill •* fa
1
J>iO00t> t~
<N rH CO
00 X Oi M Cfi w oo^ioto^t^
CO OtDNlNN CO CO 00 GO «-" »D O M HWh i-i CO
II
= 6
t^"t oooo t- rfio —i CN
CN i-h ^
CO Tj< ^« CO ^J*
CNt- CN CN
U0t>OO CN
<n eo
©t-i-i^j <n
iH CO CO 00
ID©©© ©
IO00H00 N
t- Tf rH
5*t- tN
CO l> rH
rH tN
^<<^t© ©rH CJ3N
i-( CD t*' ©rH rH
t>rH 00
COCN C5
©© *o ooo oj
(M r-( CO
s oo cn © ©
OHlOHh
rH HCO 00
iocntfhi in
rH rH CD ©
CO^lOg©
ID"* CDrH
COlOTj<t>
oocot>oo «o
rHCO CO
O rHOCO CT>
rf iO©CNCN
Tj(ONHhOMHh ©©
©©co»ot- a
©OOCO rHCN "«*
rHTf<N^C0 Wi
©©rHt>C0 «P
rHrH rH »ft
C~rH©CO© -^©CN^f©©
cniocnco^« cNrHcorH©
"3
o
© © CO rH ©
rH CD 00
fH rH
.2 g
II
rHrH©© CN
00 rH -*f
©©CO IC "**
t- CO tH
rH
ll
Ofa
CNrf©© N rH rH CO
© rH©© rH
CNiO l> HOi ©
t>r^ CN
©CD CO CN© 00
CNrH CO
c-og in
00 00 t-
COCN ©
U5H © ©Tf "*
©© ©
C-rH© CN ©
CO CO © © ID
rH rH ^
© © Ci^f CO
rHrH (N ID
ID©©© © (NrHt>© CN
rH rH CO
rHCNlO<©N ©t»
©COCO ©© fH
CNt> ©CDC- ©
CO
CO © ID ID ID 00
CN CO
rH UOIOCNCN »D
CNrf CO ID ID ©
CN 00 CO CO CN ©
CN CN
rH © © © rH ©©©©©©
S 3 -Dq.
'O O M J
Or$£ <
f §
65
9 S-S
H ^
erj ^ d*g?g
BJ,2 « O ©
O M
<SKWrD H
Ik
ill
3 00 t- 00
i—i to
r-t lOCO lO
CDCOt*CO to S CO CO (N CO (N W
el
= e
3-2
SB
Ob
S
8
00 00O© CO
»0 <N iO CD OJ
CO <N CO
IQ CO CO rH
HW2§
—100 CD CD
co^t>o<N 52 CN "*
OWiflW a i-tCD ^ CN
OlOOOCN
COCO »-l CD
co co co cd oo
CO CM «©
i-i co 10 co «3
©NO© w
COCO CD
1-HlO .t*
cot>oot> lO ©
<N ©
OlOOOas
^cotot> eo
1-4 CO
^weot- ©
rHCO *0
CMICCO iH
Hr)«<OH N
CO © t— © rHCOCN
©"^©CN io
t>on<oio «g
i—» rH CO
-*ffiOOH ^
OOCOCCt^g
C*-tJ<,-ICO© g
"* ia co o t> cn
iH ^(CNi-t t*
oco<Ni>r> © i-« i-J r-t r-t IO
OH^Wo CO
ooooe ©oooo ©
Eh En *H £s
Bfl
a s as
*-. ^ &-<
CO to CO
S3
q JC q
til
q
Alleghanv
Ashe
Wilkes Yadkin TOTAL
q
Avery
Madison Mitchell
Watauga
Yancey
TOTAL
En
CO
»N
$Eo
fa
q
3
Alexan
Davids
Davie Iredell
TOTA
q
CM
mi
66
* h i>
aillfa
2
o
CM CO no »o
-<cocm f-own
a CO© lOCO© CM
cocccm co-* ©
«-< eo
II
i I
sou
3 CMCD «N
f-tr-tCO r*
.5.5
£.2
IObI
OOOi OS
Co5<CD S?
tNrt© co
co © © co
?5co ©
852 8
m<-H©i-< t- © "^ © »HCO ^
as* 8
a
s
s
cpcoi> ©co r- ©OOCM©© fl
CM hh (D
383*83
CO00©COW
»J
C0©i-*<N<O £J ©COiH»-iCM 00
co co co qo © EJ
uo CO
IXNiflj-jCN
»OCM CO"*
<N©©© CO ©
^ CM'-" 00
C0iO©00
i-» lO»-«
tr©©«N<o jo
0©Tf -^ ©©© © ©©©©© ©
CQOO H
En *N O o N- Kn.
o: ft! £ S? 5
BQ 3 33
i^s -fi *N
q £3
4) Q
ttl 2 fc 5 1 En
CM s CM
En En O O
fa N-
3 05
h En
£ Ja
a
Q Q
atj
o
ac
En § En
C* OQ CM
S"c3
*>£"o
T3 §
J3 § En
67
S B a ooo-^^oo^^f n
of
OH
OOOOHtOOOW 00 iH kO
Tf «-H CO lO iH d> t* o^
«-H & csi o
* 2
s *
eo
u
iflOONhOH 3
<N
coooouooa »h th
^©OCDD-TfCOt* 3JkO00
3f«
HOOtDNHHH CO CM
CD© O ©iOC0<M «g j-joo
CM
rH iH COCO Hrt t> s-
1—1 ^
fc>
r-1 O O *H O OO. W © m
SE
MOQ0HXCC'-' ^ £JiO
00
Ob
r~i O © i-H OC <-l © tH COCO
CO ^ §Q0
ooo o o o o © 2j! Csj •
5
&h
5Q
*n
ffl
Q 0)
,*
!F o •<. £
&H 0)
Q J3
P3 o
§£§§.9 2
OChCh
68
•3.5 lOiOOirti-trfCO CO iC 10 lO t> CO Ifi
**r rf thco jr
MOtCO 00
-* a t-n o *o
i-" C4 I> 1-1
P
s
8gQww
uo
w
« §
CO
*< pfi W g a 8
g -
<! i
l I
H* B
i—iHHOOMfi ©
ooooooo o
HHHOONH ©
t-iOOOO(NO CO
OOOOOOO ©
tHOOOO<NO CO
COi-icvIi-iOOtH fc*
OOCNOOOrH CO
MHOHO05O **
00OO OiO a
CI © CO O © i«
tOOHQH 00
ooooo ©
5DOHOH 00
^lOOJCOCM CO
C* O CO CO O CO
hlOWON ©
MiOOO t*
<NC0 Tf OS
C0 00OCM CO
©©t>©iocQ ©i>ooo'<*
CMOiOCO t i-i -rt ©
Nrt°SS
O00O<N
c^ot>cort< £• Oi O 3 <N CO
Oiooo oo io
i-i IN IO
1
""' --
i
OCOC^Tfi-HrHrH t* t^O lO^ IT3 r-(
00 <Ni-l<N Ifl
o MO^t*HcoHco ©Ifi
1
1
s
OHNOOffiTf CO
1-iCO M5
CONOCO ^ CM T-lr-l lO
OICOCNOJ ©
•8
c
*S
0<Nl0^iHlOI> -«*
rH iH i-l CO i-l © e h Ha H H H r- -^ WO^ lO © CO lO
flag |SiJ
IiIsjIp d*Q P S « a 4>
tj be ,
o ca.S^
i&ttg
.Sis 5
3*> O
69
31 B -
BO
00 CO t£ CC CO
.-H CM — lO
t- CM OS
IO CD i-i
OO OS
h- r- CO r^-
COCO CM »-<
CM
O^cOocHo ©NHH 00 <*< CM CM U5
r- Hwm cm
9-4 CO OS
CDt> CO OtDNH OS CMOS CD t^
»—• »—* CO
CO 00 CM CO
r-i CM "V
oo i-i to io o t^iO N OONO CI HHO CM ©fHCM CO
©©os-* cm ^OSrCHM i-l ©CD©rHf» i-tCCCD IO CO t- O © tO THr-l CO i-H CM ^5
eq^grrg S°fi OC0OO CO 33 3 OOOO 00
1Q
©rH CO CO e oo e OOOO o O^O ^ OOCM CM
1
I
CMOOi-t
CM S3 s°s O CO O O CO "<*«OiO OS
CMrH CO
ooco to
i-H IH
1
•B
oso *-i os
Tf CO
OS
oo rs COi-HOCO CO
1-lCM «*
i-tOSO0 oo
CMCM IO
OHSTltOOO ^J tO
1-H FH
I
I
iOOOSt>
t4
1-H
CO
'tfCM t© O^OHUJ CMCDiH OS O t><*t IH
CM CO
c *°g3S s OOCO »H
t- 00
vO t> O lO 00 OS CO t* OS
i-HCM "*
I
OtOCM^
OS t*-CM
1-H
CM
a
CMO CM
OS "^ CO
CO t*»
rHC*- HO OS CMOCMrH IO
rH 1-4
t-i-W CM
coos oo •$
l>CMO OS CMOCM 2 CMrH CO
I
IQ
COCMt>iO
CO i-tTf OS
r-tlO tO
CDr-t t*
KS^HO O i-Ht-4 CO
CM i-l 00 »H
CMCM IO
IOCM0S tO
1
t*Tj«lOOS
IO lOt- aPH
i-HIO to
to to
COCOOO OS
i-HCSrHi-H CM
iH
100(0 i-i CMOrH CO
^SScm*
Eh E"H &S
o O O
*•< »»«
K 8 0) S
h Eh > c^
CQ CO
New
Hanc
Pender TOTAL
N, ^ 2
En >
Duplin
Jones
Onslow
Sampsor
TOTAL
5
CO
& 3
slid .2.2.2.3?
figtsifi - cs a) o O
iffiffi£
CN o
2
CO
a j q o d •
o
Sugg
I
^12 g
Wig
70
If
05 ^ ?h g> i—i ^*
COOOCOoScN ©
O^THio-rf O OS
C*©CN©© OS
C^rHCO^O © i-lrH eo
CO
<N CO OS CO
CO 00 Pj co^ a
OS OS
OiO^f ft
Oit-CN &
c^ eo
ootj<i-i eo
i-It-<CN U5
10 1-1 ce
OS Os cn i-H ^
F- ^ CO ^f CN© CI 1*000 eo,
3~3 IONO t*
H
^<<<*cococn OS
1H tN
!6
^OOON «D t^
s
1
©^coco© eo
r-4
I ©COtHC^CN <N
CMrH 1-HrH t* 8
T-l
•8
i
COOHHft ^*»
1H Si
5
1B
'5
I
COCO©COCO 00 (NHH U5
CO
CO
I
t>COOSiOl*- **
iH^tNt*- l^ i
1
1
OOCOOOCOlO t*
£ 5
1c
-
©COiHtNCN t^
'tfCNt"- ^wm4
CO
hohN
TfCOtN N
<NOr>
COCOrH
OS 00© t> U5HH 00
ssrs
I>00«5 r+
v* CO
tNCOC© iH
CO
CN
CNOOi-l f-l coio^g
00 t4 9
1-1
OO CN 8
OOr-t
CN
00 CN
i-HtH
CN i
r-t iH £
r>i-i
1-1
t>C0
CO i
OS©
THrH
rH 8
1-1
CO"*
8"" s
NO^ «D
OOH 1H
CN©C0 U5
COOCO OS
CNI-HO CN
1-iCO© "«*
CO CO
IOI>CO iO
CN CO OS
CNCOOS ^
-<*CO© iM
^2§
©lOCO r4
*<* CN ^ iM
•5= fl j
silise s 2 s §« 5
h h
O -H •^i
05 a:
h ^
CO CO
•-H "»<
3 Q
fc fc h TO ^
^ £ •-<
Us
71
S
O 5k
no C
fflCQcS
^
H I
a
cO h w
l> © rH l>
tO H 00
OJOM N
00© oo to
10 i>
t> 00
<N r-H
M00HCM ^©
OO ©
H00HCM M©
CO© CO lO CO
CM
iciHino «
NC5HH 3
©© IOCO CO
i-HiO rH ©
82E
r-4 CO K
rH rH
COrH "*
too ©
CM CO lO
©rHi s
ooo ©
CM CM W
TfCO l>
CM CO
©rH©© 1-t
00 rH ©
"8
i o
t—
1
to 1-4 CO CO
CM
CM©
CM CM SS
tOOTfO ©
cm eo
i>© t*
k>rH 00
3e
H 00
iO©|> CM
rH
00©
"tfCM S COCOtJ< |> k>
rHCM CM © I>CM ©
oo to ^ CMrH ^
6
CO
s
E
00 CMrH CO © CO rH ^* WiflOtO ^
iH
CM 00 © lOCO ©
Q
asc
2
iX
CO
CO © Tf* ©©
UOIO
^CM © O 00-^rH CO
rH rH CM W5
WtJ< OS
CO CM iO
CMrH CO
I
l>
to
CM
rHrHCM
00 (NO
l—l tH
5©!
CO
lOOO
t> rH
rH rH
CO ©
CM
CHOOOC^M"©^ ©H
rH CM
©CM rH CM© CM ©CO ©_
1i
E £030
1—
1
too to
CM CM
CM
CM rH S CO 00 CO ^ 00 I>C0 ©
r3i28
ic
*3
I
& ICH tO
•OCMt-i-
l
CM
8
©^ •OO
rH rH
lO
CM
©CM©© rH
rHOiCOiO ©
rH
CM© i-C ©CO CO
a s ? 5
,3.3 S 5
o
CO
EC
o c 3
IIS
Eco H
72
CO
3 c Tf NHin U OCOOSrH Tf t*
TpCOOSCOrH rH
00 CNCDCOCN ©toco CO© ©
A
p 2 Ol^TfiO CO lO rH »ocN
CO CM
3 C2
H 8 HHHIO © rH rH rH IO 1ft CO CN CO
m rH
—3
© ^ 00 CO 3 TfOWOIN 00 rH r-<NT)< co © © CNCO© m o rH CM HHNHIfl lO Tf rH rH t» Hh s
B rH rH
!
X
*8
i
HH^lS IA tCOOiOW <* CO o©«to ^» ©CNCD © 00
*» rH CN rH rH rH rH
| Q
1
z c
3
OOCOrfg
gj rHrH rH ^*
00
CO
t>CN©C0
CO rHrH
CM © © ©t-OS
rHCO GO
S i-i 1H
91 B
-a
cN©Tpt> o* ©COC0l>© Ifl CN rH OS 00© 3 ©lOOSrH M
a H t- 00 r-* co Tl« <N rH rH CN
8
n
73
s
S ©rHrHOO e OOONN OS CO ©rHIO© CC OHOrC in
43
Q
lH rH
s5
& I
Q "3
i
cnioco© g 0©COlOCN © 8 rHOOCO©
CN rH 9 ©TfOSt> 8
| rococo
coocoo o ©lOCNCNt- CO os ©CO lO "<* HO CO
CN CN©l>Tt< co H a rHCOCMTfCO Tf U5 00 CNlOrH 9) &
I
rH rH rH rH rH rH
86
1
X 3
S ©©©CN rH OrHCMCOCO CN ^-* (NO5C0(N © rHCO CO CN cs
tj rHCN -* rH rH r-i ^ CO H CN
n
a 5
1c
HHCDH
?5
Or|*00^ t}< 00 00"<? CNCN © rHt^TtCN
•3 COOS (N00 CNCNCOCN © CN © lO W rHIO rH a
c5
15
05
CI rH rH rH
1
CNCNCOCN
Tf CO OHO
rH CN
OS ©CNCNCNCO 00 CO 3«CN©iQ
COtFCNCO
rH rH
t- "^ t-rHOS rH
&et
8X
rH CNt>©©lO £ 00
CN u CN©CN CN
rH
1
g
a
1
5
00© O 00
rH COt- eo
rH
CMrHrH CO
lO CD©©© rHCNrH^i 8 ©C-CNlO
rH 3
o*
1
1
S
'3
*>
^* CO CO ^
<NCN©t>
rH'' rH 1
rHf-OOOSOP CO
IC ^ lO ^ rH
CN
rH '
CO
H00NCHN©OlSO
rH I
Tt«©©Tj<
CNTf CN 5
T3
§g3 a o
o a
I 9rb~
s|aS
£ g
G 1
ca'O cd
I'll <QQ rH H
M4S "
73
W CO _^ ei r_,
io4cN3«^h
CNt- Oi 00
COTf H OJ
IXNOl 00
(NiO 00
MO^QCO CM
coo <-»o 1-4 oo
t-oeoosio 3
OOSQ «0
00 CO »o
8*38
98
CO coco us
CNCO CO
r-4Tf O IO-CS
CM CO CD
<NC0 CO
W^OOH
o
CO o O O O 00
N^fOOH f-lOCO^<
313
fH^CO *G
^CNtH t*
SS^S
*8°fo
38*-
8
CO
2 CiCTii-nO^t 00
tH>HiH lO
]a
ii
5
CN^COCNtH 04
"8
e t-iococoeo co
00«HTf COOi 00
i-» i-t »-t CN <N O
t-CNCOCOlO Q rH CO
H©HC0TJ< 00
i-t ^^CN CO
iOCOOO <0
t-c-o
U0COU5
00 kft,-) ^ 00OCO »Q
i-<CNC7S W
CNCOlO w*
l>C0CN OJ cot-© a
CN Tj» O
i-<CNCN lO
coocn *a
COJO^OJ
^fcotN ov
CN»-<iO « rHW CO
OS (5 CO 0)
i-llOCN o>
*OCOO
©iocs I
o"3 be >,»J
>» 2.X2 2 ® <
>^^^ co O
Eh 6h O O N- *<
oq 05
^H C«H
co CO
N< »"•<
q
CM
Burke
Caldwell
Catawba
TOTAL
EC
CO
If
i c
CD O
oo
*h O
*H
Q5
&H
CO
JS
c J Q a
°2
IS 00
ooc
3
»J H S3 PQ
74
1* lOTf «-HOO<N H• Oi CO 05 Oi
CO
OQOOOOO(N<NO CO t* kO ko
* §88
^CD^f CO^t
CD0000COO1 <*
12 2
OOOUiOOO W 00h
*8
OOOOOOO O 00 Oi
C3IOO<N^" CO
CO iH Ift
i-l«-<©©,-4
HTfONCO ©
OOrHCO tD"<t 1^
Oi C* <p-< «H CO t*
Oi00<N©00 t-coooooooco
»g &S °>
-
csoooooo ** go *!
^oooooo ih t* oo
3g§
o> t*- HOOrfOOOHj
rJ<COi-«co«0 O i-l HH(N t»
WOO00(NTr<N i-l OI CO * 2 od a
o>£jTpt-© w COCO t^CO tH
00O5»-t^Oi tH
COO* t-4 OS
^COCOCOi-l t*
CO <©<N 0*
*h oo oo ph oj oo t- *& »« n^ Tf w cocq
o> oo oo ccoo ii--<tccooi»-h< eo c*s oij
a* a |a
(N © © 00 i-H£> <C C*
gs -Eg
II J|
js^fJ
0) 00 <
$ ll
5 >>•«
§ S 3 c 3
>»-c C.H S*d H
3T c * 2M > Q
75
II
(X, CL
DISTRICT COURT ACTIVITY IN MOTOR VEHICLE
AND SMALL CLAIM CASES*
January 1, 1971 — December 31, 1971
Percent of Motor Vehicle Cases
Disposed of by Waiver'
Percent of Small Claim Cases
Disposed of by Magistrate1
Motor
Vehicle
Cases Filed
Motor Vehicle
Cases Percent
Disposed of Disposed of
by Waiver by Waiver
Small
Claims
Piled
Percent
Disposed Disposed
of by of by
Magistrate Magistrate
1ST DISTRICT
Camden
Chowan
Currituck
Dare
Gates
Pasquotank
Perquimans
579
1,211
716
1,115
871
1,771
658
393
830
423
676
694
1,151
512
67.9
68.5
59.1
60.6
79.7
65.0
77.8
203
180
194
232
246
977
146
169
216
234
227
225
1,016
145
83.3
120.0
120.6
97.8
91.5
104.0
99.3
TOTAL 6,921 4,679 67.6 2,178 2,232 102.5
2ND DISTRICT
Beaufort
Hyde
Martin
Tyrrell
Washington
3,570
289
3,619
214
895
3,520
185
2,673
232
992
98.6
64.0
73.9
108.4
110.8
606
37
494
38
212
607
27
487
31
123
100.2
73.0
98.6
81.6
58.0
TOTAL 8,587 7,602 88.5 1,387 1,275 91.9
3RD DISTRICT
Carteret
Craven
Pamlico
Pitt
3,997
5,370
670
8,547
2,438
3,236
356
4,554
61.0
60.3
53.1
53.3
335
557
93
1,127
325
522
75
1,084
97.0
93.7
80.6
96.2
TOTAL 18,584 10,584 57.0 2,112 2,006 95.0
4TH DISTRICT
Duplin
Jones
Onslow
Sampson
4,384
796
9,208
4,620
4,559
432
5,024
3,576
104.0
54.3
54.6
77.4
896
56
1,248
697
696
70
1,315
923
77.7
125.0
105.4
132.4
TOTAL 19,008 13,591 71.5 2,897 3,004 103.7
5TH DISTRICT
New Hanover
Pender
9,654
2,246
5,779
1,187
59.9
52.8
1,476
353
1,254
349
85.0
98.9
TOTAL 11,900 6,966 58.5 1,829 1,603 87.6
1. In some counties, the per cent of cases disposed of exceeds one hundred per cent
because cases pending on January, 1, 1971 are not included in the "filed" column. The
figures in both the "filed" and "disposed of" columns are for the calendar year 1971.
Some of the cases filed in 1971 will not be disposed of until 1972 and some of the
cases disposed of in 1971 were filed in 1970. Assuming a fairly constant rate of filing
and disposition, the percentages are relatively accurate.
* These two tables are combined for convenience of format ; they are not otherwise
related.
76
Percent of Motor Vehicle Cases
Disposed of by Waiver*
Percent of Small Claim Cases
Disposed of by Magistrate 1
Motor
Vehicle
Cases Filed
Motor Vehicle
Cases Percent
Disposed of Disposed of
by Waiver by Waiver
SmaU
Claims
Piled
Percent
Disposed Disposed
of by of by
Magistrate Magistrate
6TH DISTRICT
Bertie 2,381
Halifax 6,095
Hertford 2,266
Northampton 1,569
2,111
3,250
1,527
1,156
88.7
53.3
67.4
73.7
238
645
270
231
234
575
243
159
98.3
89.1
90.0
68.8
TOTAL 12,311 8,044 65.3 1,384 1,211 87.5
7TH DISTRICT
Edgecombe 5,172
Nash 7,378
Wilson 6,393
3,597
5,399
4,898
69.5
73.2
76.6
1,236
926
1,663
1,213
932
1,603
98.1
100.6
96.4
TOTAL 18,943 13,894 73.3 3,825 3,748 98.0
8TH DISTRICT
Greene 1,541
Lenoir 7,058
Wayne 8,432
997
4,528
5,402
64.7
64.2
64.1
137
869
993
106
1,513
944
77.4
174.1
95.1
TOTAL 17,031 10,927 64.2 1,999 2,563 128.2
9TH DISTRICT
Franklin 2,885
Granville 3,578
Person 3,295
Vance 2,994
Warren 1,575
2,038
2,936
2,598
2,951
1,244
70.6
82.1
78.8
98.6
79.0
472
428
1,158
753
200
429
433
903
943
173
90.9
101.2
78.0
125.2
86.5
TOTAL 14,327 11,767 82.1 3,011 2,881 95.7
10TH DISTRICT
Wake 40,010 29,385 73.4 5,741 5,220 90.9
UTH DISTRICT
Harnett 5,230
Johnston 9,089
Lee 3,094
4,282
6,130
2,853
81.9
67.4
92.2
612
910
573
573
799
571
93.6
87.8
99.7
TOTAL 17,413 13,265 76.2 2,095 1,943 92.7
12TH DISTRICT
Cumberland 23,436
Hoke 2,222
10,326
1,504
44.1
67.7
2,296
140
2,138
140
93.1
100.0
TOTAL 25,658 11,830 46.1 2,436 2,278 93.5
In some counties, the per cent of cases disposed of exceeds one hundred per cent
because oases pending on January, 1, 1971 are not included in the "filed" column. The
figures in both the "filed" and "disposed of" columns are for the calendar year 1971.
Some of the cases filed in 1971 will not be disposed of until 1972 and some of the
cases disposed of in 1971 were filed in 1970. Assuming a fairly constant rate of filing
and disposition, the percentages are relatively accurate.
77
Percent of Motor Vehicle Cases
Disposed of by Waiver1
Percent of Small Claim Cases
Disposed of by Magistrate 1
Motor
Vehicle
Cases Filed
13TH DISTRICT
Motor Vehicle
Cases Percent
Disposed of Disposed of
by Waiver by Waiver
Small
Claims
Filed
Percent
Disposed Disposed
of by of by
Magistrate Magistrate
Bladen 3,134
Brunswick 3,290
Columbus 5,916
TOTAL 12,340
1,579
1,965
2,578
6,122
50.4
59.7
43.6
50.0
464
455
645
1,564
397
423
536
1,356
85.6
93.0
83.1
86.7
14TH DISTRICT
Durham 15,747 6,795 43.2 4,843 4,203 86.8
15TH DISTRICT
Alamance 10,933
Chatham 3,569
Orange 4,766
TOTAL 19,268
8,276
2,360
3,060
13,696
75.7
66.1
64.2
71.1
1,328
500
303
2,131
1,312
313
285
1,910
98.8
62.6
94.1
89.6
16TH DISTRICT
Robeson 9,816
Scotland 2,555
TOTAL 12,371
4,729
1,663
6,392
48.2
65.1
51.7
1,742
388
2,130
1,614
385
1,999
92.7
99.2
93.8
17TH DISTRICT
Caswell 2,227
Rockingham 8,354
Stokes 2,023
Surry 5,040
TOTAL 17,644
1,535
5,306
1,396
3,097
11,333
68.9
63.5
69.0
61.4
64.2
223
672
267
1,732
2,894
209
649
216
1,051
2,125
93.7
96.6
80.9
60.7
73.4
18TH DISTRICT
Guilford—
Greensboro 40,546
High Point 15,505
TOTAL 56,051
22,872
12,374
35,246
56.4
79.8
62.9
6,181
2,361
8,542
6,535
2,408
8,943
105.7
102.0
104.7
19TH DISTRICT
Cabarrus 8,212
Montgomery 3,242
Randolph 9,524
Rowan 7,681
TOTAL 28,659
6,623
2,471
6,533
5,953
21,580
80.7
76.2
68.6
77.5
75.3
1,206
237
739
846
3,028
803
213
516
750
2,282
66.6
89.9
69.8
88.7
75.4
In some counties, the per cent of cases disposed of exceeds one hundred per cent
because cases pending on January, 1, 1971 are not included in the "filed" column. The
figures in both the "filed" and "disposed of" columns are for the calendar year 1971.
Some of the cases filed in 1971 will not be disposed of until 1972 and some of the
cases disposed of in 1971 were filed in 1970. Assuming a fairly constant rate of filing
and disposition, the percentages are relatively accurate.
78
Percent of Motor Vehicle Cases
Disposed of by Waiver1
Percent «
Disposed
f Small Claim Cases
of by Magistrate1
Motor
Vehicle
Cases Filed
Motor Vehicle
Cases Percent
Disposed of Disposed of
by Waiver by Waiver
Small
Claims
Piled
Percent
Disposed Disposed
of by of by
Magistrate Magistrate
20TH DISTRICT
Anson 2,715
Moore 4,306
Richmond 4,314
Stanly 4,184
Union 4,833
2,648
3,387
2,607
3,946
3,164
97.5
78.7
60.4
94.3
65.5
310
329
518
720
589
267
311
501
674
571
86.1
94.5
96.7
93.6
96.9
TOTAL 20,352 15,752 77.4 2,466 2,324 94.2
21ST DISTRICT
Forsyth 33,535 23,753 70.8 3,227 3,197 99.1
22ND DISTRICT
Alexander 1,640
Davidson 9,166
Davie 2,897
Iredell 8,542
1,245
6,292
1,977
5,062
75.9
68.6
68.2
59.3
164
603
97
1,101
160
509
90
1,014
97.6
84.4
92.3
92.1
TOTAL 22,245 14,576 65.5 1,965 1,773 90.2
23RD DISTRICT
Alleghany 647
Ashe 921
Wilkes 4,003
Yadkin 1,646
393
425
2,207
1,287
60.7
46.1
55.1
78.2
97
193
470
194
91
181
409
183
93.8
93.8
87.0
94.3
TOTAL 7,217 4,312 59.7 954 864 90.6
24TH DISTRICT
Avery 1,503
Madison 948
Mitchell 932
Watauga 2,117
Yancey 1,032
1,040
814
762
1,610
893
69.2
85.9
81.8
76.1
86.5
43
41
38
99
43
49
58
31
86
24
114.0
141.5
81.6
86.9
55.8
TOTAL 6,532 5,119 78.4 264 248 93.9
25TH DISTRICT
Burke 7,292
Caldwell 7,067
Catawba 10,417
4,387
4,333
6,977
60.2
61.3
67.0
663
1,007
1,134
549
856
1,171
82.8
85.0
103.3
TOTAL 24,776 15,697 63.4 2,804 2,576 91.9
In some counties, the per cent of cases disposed of exceeds one hundred per cent
because cases pending on January, 1, 1971 are not included in the "filed" column. The
figures in both the "filed" and "disposed of" columns are for the calendar year 1971.
Some of the cases filed in 1971 will not be disposed of until 1972 and some of the
eases disposed of in 1971 were filed in 1970. Assuming a fairly constant rate of filing
and disposition, the percentages are relatively accurate.
79
Percent of Motor Vehicle Cases
Disposed of by Waiver1
Motor
Vehicle
Cases Filed
26TH DISTRICT
Motor Vehicle
Cases Percent
Disposed of Disposed of
by Waiver by Waiver
Mecklenburg 42,660 26,968 63.2
27TH DISTRICT
Cleveland
Gaston
Lincoln
TOTAL
6,677
16,626
3,993
27,296
4,183
10,014
2,292
16,489
62.6
60.2
57.4
60.4
28TH DISTRICT
Buncombe 14,298 9,018 63.1
29TH DISTRICT
Henderson
McDowell
Polk
Rutherford
Transylvania
TOTAL
4,420
2,758
1,068
3,400
957
12,603
2,875
2,003
927
2,252
610
8,667
65.0
72.6
86.8
66.2
63.7
68.8
30TH DISTRICT
Cherokee
Clay
Graham
Haywood
Jackson
Macon
Swain
TOTAL
891
489
318
3,907
1,148
1,434
658
8,845
855
267
267
2,603
555
934
318
5,799
96.0
54.6
84.0
66.6
48.3
65.1
48.3
65.6
GRAND
TOTAL 593,132 389,848 65.7
Percent of Small Claim Cases
Disposed of by Magistrate1
Percent
Small Disposed Disposed
Claims of by of by
Filed Magistrate Magistrate
9,088 9,189
1,090 919
83,610 79,188
101.1
1,205
2,180
308
1,170
2,131
251
97.1
97.8
81.5
3,693 3,552 96.2
84.3
254 239 94.1
292 342 117.1
43 10 23.3
452 426 94.2
162 116 71.6
1,203 1,133 94.2
233 97 41.6
51 45 88.2
36 31 86.1
200 191 95.5
128 126 98.4
124 102 82.3
58 39 67.2
830 631 76.0
94.7
In some counties, the per cent of cases disposed of exceeds one hundred per cent
because cases pending on January, 1, 1971 are not included in the "filed" column. The
figures in both the "filed" and "disposed of" columns are for the calendar year 1971.
Some of the cases filed in 1971 will not be disposed of until 1972 and some of the
cases disposed of in 1971 were filed in 1970. Assuming a fairly constant rate of filing
and disposition, the percentages are relatively accurate.
80
DAYS OF COURT HELD AT EACH SEAT
OF THE DISTRICT COURT*
1971 Calendar Year
Civil Criminal Total
1ST DISTRICT (2 Judges)
Camden—Camden 1 23% 24i/
2
Chowan—Edenton 5 45 50
Currituck—Currituck 3 23 26
Dare—Manteo 5 40 45
Gates—Gatesville 18 18
Pasquotank—Elizabeth City 20i/
2
53i/
2 74
Perquimans—Hertford 4 26i/
2 80%
TOTAL 38i/
2 2291/2 268
2ND DISTRICT (2 Judges)
Beaufort—Washington 46i/2 105 15iy2
Hyde—Swan Quarter 3 25 28
Martin—Williamston 21% 66 871/2
Tyrrell—Columbia 21 21
Washington—Plymouth 8 43 51
TOTAL 79 260 339
3RD DISTRICT (4 Judges)
Carteret—Beaufort 47i/
2 1231/2 171
Craven—New Bern 82i/
2 235 317i/
2
Pamlico—Bayboro 5i/2 21 26i/
2
Pitt—Greenville 88 196i/
2
284i/
2
Farmville 22 22
Ayden 1 19 20
TOTAL 2241/2 617 841i/2
4TH DISTRICT (4 Judges)
Duplin—Kenansville 39i/
2 85 124i/
2
Jones—Trenton 51/2 18 23%
Onslow—Jacksonville 1781/2 2291/2 408
Sampson—Clinton 68 1151/2 183%
TOTAL 29114 448 739i/
2
5TH DISTRICT (3 Judges)
New Hanover—Wilmington 249 338 587
Pender—Burgaw 23 40 63
TOTAL 272 378 650
6TH DISTRICT (3 Judges)
Bertie—Windsor 14 48 62
Halifax—Halifax 22 113 135
Roanoke Rapids 6 45 51
Hertford—Winton 20 50 70
Northampton—Jackson 4 45 49
TOTAL 66 301 367
7TH DISTRICT (4 Judges)
Edgecombe—Tarboro 321/2 861/2 119
Nash—Nashville 58 871/2 1451/2
Rocky Mount 271/2 79 IO61/2
Wilson—Wilson 6OI/2 139 199i/
2
TOTAL 178i/
2 392 570i/2
All days of court at each seat were not necessarily held by a judge assigned to the
designated judicial district. In 1971 District Court Judges held a total of 177M: days
of court in judicial districts other than their own.
81
Ciril Criminal Total
8TH DISTRICT (4 Judges)
Greene—Snow Hill
Lenoir—Kinston
Wayne—Goldsboro
Mount Olive
91/2
96i/
2
1191/2
36
166
160
36
45y2
262%
279%
36
TOTAL 2251/2 398 628%
9TH DISTRICT (3 Judges)
Franklin—Louisburg
Granville—Oxford
Person—Roxboro
Vance—Henderson
Warren—Warrenton
18
2
8
1
61/2
46
50
49
56
29
64
52
57
57
35i/
2
TOTAL 351/2 230 2651/2
10TH DISTRICT (5 Judges)
Wake—Raleigh
Fuquay-Varina
Wendell
414 645
25
25
1,059
25
25
TOTAL 414 695 1,109
11TH DISTRICT (4 Judges)
Harnett—Lillington
Dunn
Johnston—Smithfield
Benson
Selma
Lee—Sanford
106
8II/2
1
73
118
50
140
46
46
112
224
50
2211/2
47
46
185
TOTAL 261i/
2 512 7731/2
12TH DISTRICT (4 Judges)
Cumberland—Fayetteville
Hoke—Raeford
TOTAL
319
11%
3301/4
456
43i/
2
4991/2
775
55
830
13TH DISTRICT (2 Judges)
Bladen—Elizabethtown
Brunswick—Southport
Shallotte
Columbus—Whiteville
Tabor City
TOTAL
33
40
80
153
76
60
33
82
26
277
109
100
33
162
26
430
14TH DISTRICT (3 Judges)
Durham—Durham 264 467i/
2 73iy2
15TH DISTRICT (4 Judges)
Alamance—Graham 202 229i/
2 431%
Chatham—Pittsboro 371/2 38% 76
Siler City 10i/
2 41 51i/
2
Orange—Hillsborough $0% 101 161%
Chapel Hill 4 49i/
2
53i/
2
TOTAL 314% 459% 774
82
Ciril Criminal Total
16TH DISTRICT (3 Judges)
Robeson—Lumberton 153 143 296
Fairmont 2 38 40
Maxton 68 68
Red Springs 33 33
Rowland 22 22
Saint Pauls 42 42
Scotland—Laurinburg 70 92 162
TOTAL 225 438 663
17TH DISTRICT (4 Judges)
Caswell—Yanceyville 9 49 58
Rockingham—Wentworth 60 4 64
Reidsville y2 99 99i/
2
Eden 881/2 881/2
Madison 48 48
Stokes—Danbury 191/2 45i/
2 65
Surry—Dobson 3oy2 15iy2 182
TOTAL 1191/2 4851/z 605
18TH DISTRICT ((7 Judges)
Guilford—
Greensboro 5231/2 5251/2 1,049
High Point 221 216i/
2 4371/2
TOTAL 74414 742 l,486i/2
19TH DISTRICT (5 Judges)
Cabarrus—Concord 1051/2 88 193i/
2
Kannapolis 1 48 49
Montgomery—Troy 54 59 113
Randolph—Asheboro 140i/
2
147i/
2 288
Rowan—Salisbury H21/2 151 263i/
2 TOTAL 4131/2 493i/2 907
20TH DISTRICT (4 Judges)
Anson—Wadesboro 20i/
2 711/2 92
Moore—Carthage 39 72 111
Southern Pines 1 26 27
Richmond—Rockingham 29 85 114
Stanly—Albemarle 27i/
2 71 981/
Union—Monroe 36i/
2 72V2 109
"
TOTAL 1531/$ 398 551i/
2
21ST DISTRICT (5 Judges)
Forsyth—Winston-Salem 516 420 936
Kernersville V2
5l6i/2
3 3y2 TOTAL 423 9391/
22ND DISTRICT (4 Judges)
Alexander—Taylorsville 26 42 68
Davidson—Lexington 138 103 241
Thomasville 3 102 105
Davie—Mocksville 27 48 75
Iredell—Statesville 100 155 255
Mooresville 3 51 54
TOTAL 297 501 798
83
23RD DISTRICT (2 Judges)
aril Criminal Total
Alleghany—Sparta
Ashe—Jefferson
Wilkes—Wilkerson
Yadkin—Yadkinville
22
23
132
27
26
25
99
44
48
48
231
71
TOTAL 204 194 398
24TH DISTRICT (2 Judges)
Avery—Newland
Madison—Marshall
Mitchell Bakersville
Watauga—Boone
Yancey—Burnsville
HV2
12
17
18
10i/
2
27
25i/
2
22
6iy2
27i/
2
38i/
2
37i/
2
39
791/2
38
TOTAL 69 I631/2 2321,4
25TH DISTRICT (4 Judges)
Burke—Morganton
Caldwell—Lenoir
Catawba—Newton
Hickory
71i/
2
8iy2
74
72i/
2
I451/2
141
102
146
217
2221/2
176
218i/
2
TOTAL 2991/2 5341/2 834
26TH DISTRICT (7 Judges)
Mecklenburg—Charlotte 601 6241/4 1,2251/4
27TH DISTRICT (5 Judges)
Cleveland—Shelby
Gaston—Gastonia
Lincoln—Lincolnton
64
244
28
I86I/2
411
74
2501/2
655
102
TOTAL 336 6711/2 1,0071/2
28TH DISTRICT (4 Judges)
Buncombe—Asheville 386 549 935
29TH DISTRICT (3 Judges)
Henderson—Hendersonville
McDowell—Marion
Polk—Columbus
Rutherford—Rutherfordton
Transylvania—Brevard
47
43
11
69
38
85
73
17
76
49
132
116
28
145
87
TOTAL 208 300 508
30TH DISTRICT (2 Judges)
Cherokee—Murphy
Clay—Hayesville
Graham—Robbinsville
Haywood—Waynesville
Canton
Jackson—Sylva
Macon—Franklin
Swain—Bryson City
4
27
9
5
29
21
11
12
76
14
27
21
27
25
11
12
103
14
36
26
56
TOTAL 74 209 283
Group I
Group II
6,3751/2
1,420
10,6673/i
2,223
17,04314
3,643
GRAND TOTAL 7,795!/2 12,890% 20,68614
84
FISCAL OPERATIONS
1970-71
The district court system operated in 83 counties from
July 1, 1970 to June 30, 1971, and in 17 counties from Decem-ber
7, 1970 to June 30, 1971. With the addition of 17 new coun-ties,
both receipts and expenditures increased substantially over
the previous fiscal year. The ratio of receipts to expenditures
remained approximately the same, with total receipts from court
operations exceeding State expenditures by more than one mil-lion
dollars.
State Expenditures for the
Judicial Department $22,057,741.52
State and Local Receipts from
Court Operations $23,332,388.59
Distribution of Receipts by type and unit of government receiving funds:
Superior and District
Court Fees (State) $ 7,324,567.41
Supreme Court Fees (State) 5,113.75
Court of Appeals Fees (State) 13,407.80
Sale of Reports (State) 36,697.08
Law Enforcement Officers Benefit
and Retirement Fund (State) 1,949,757.25
Total State Revenues $ 9,329,543.29
Facilities Fees (Counties) 1,751,255.91
Officer Fees (Counties) 922,278.62
Jail Fees (Counties) 410,635.10
Fines and Forfeitures (Counties) 10,163,064.49
Total County Revenues $13,247,234.12
Facilities Fees (Municipalities) 120,741.25
Officer Fees (Municipalities) 571,240.33
Jail Fees (Municipalities) 63,629.60
Total Municipal Revenues $ 755,611.18
Of total court receipts, 31.6% or $7,379,786.04 went into the
State General Fund. The balance was distributed to the Law En-forcement
Officers Benefit and Retirement Fund (8.4%) and
the counties (56.7%) and municipalities (3.3%) of the State.
Receipts deposited in the State's general fund amounted
to 33.5% of the State's expenditures for the Judicial Depart-ment.
Total State receipts (both general fund and LEOB&RF)
equaled 42.3% of Judicial Department expenditures.
The table which follows gives a county by county break-down
of fees distributed to each county and the municipalities
within that county.
85
•3 t> 00
X CO 1-4
OrHioioooi>iLO'-Hcoooiooo^otDocj50iOiooors-o pLqoirHp^.i>cDaioooo^^^couopc>ac<jpc^pcoi>»--i
t> oi CO t-h cd 10 © 10 oi t* to 00 Cl' CO t-h O) 10 © Ti< IO r-i CO I> CO CD OtDt^HinHOo00rtlCDC0MH05(NI>(NlO050000O05Tp
05 co~ 05 lo co" t> 00" of <* co" co" co" t> t> flT ^" »o co" cd" tf" 00"05 o>" CO co" OOHCOOWOOl>.U5t>OHHNCOHOO'^iONO ,^COlCN
,-1 ^l^i^g^ ,_! W ^,-4^00
CO
0000 §00
p
S3
Q
w£
few
So
HE
5
os
'
3 5
© ©Q OOOOCO O l> p
,_ _ 00 © CO l> C5 00 CD i-i (Nt-'r-i OOOOOO^C0Ot>O<NO<J5OOO00O«DOOt><NC0OO
<N 00 CO00CN NOH
CO
IS q
lis
8*
0Pp0p0p0p0p0p0p0p<0N0O0t0>0p0p0p 0p0p0p0p ooi 1006
(NO
iHIO
p0p0i0q0o
iidcoei
- ^, —-_ -v w W -w^ -w» w -w w s»» »•
"J W L — V../ W "—
^
W >««/ >«/ W V../ W «*./ W
2. ^^(N^CDaDTfOO0dC0<NTtC0''^tD 005 10*00 i-H id CD <N
<3*rt S2 c3^^^^ooo5©©i>ooT-HoocNico©©o5<Nco©rHCOi>io©
5." O5C0r-C<trH 00 Tt< Tf IO COCO© rH "> © © t- CO 00 00 IO ©
2 g cq cn co* lO^eCai" cm" rf r-T r-T cd'to^oo"
p2o0 020° o2 o°
<NlO <N t 00 00
—1 1— ».& ©OOOOOOOiO(NOOOOO<N©C0rH©OOO00OiOO
O^rf »H WOO CM t^
iHCsf rH o"^t co" a*
!i <N
60
1 ^tHOOOO
fc> 73 £ C5HO
C5 CD CO 00
1—1 WOiH
J-s.
gg Ort<l> (NH
03 (N
p* V*
,__ OOO
s > moo
03
fa c _— s
OffSr-i
•^« <N <D(N
fe ooco
rtrj OiH
Hl0OOO'<tiflHM00OOOOt0i00105OiflOl0t'O
WTj;qoocqiq(Ncqooo»o DOqi>cqio^o^coT);oqH
OC000rHI>(NC000CDI>-OJ0it>TfrHlOrHt^
000 o 00 O ooo 000 000 100000000 ri ppiqpcNpS^qooppppiqTtooooopiqp g
Tt" <N <N OS C<i VM- O O* CD 00* l>' t> O IO <N IO CO 00 O t> ?* <N 00' rH WWHt-QOoOmi'lOCOO^INOHNfflHOCObCOHO
05 1> 05 cq p^io ^: Hco>t> <m o^co^o^rH iqo 10 co th c» 10 "«*
^rHC0'>
THC0"c<fc0I> r-T tHCD" CM Of /vC/vT^in
c ^52a^^^5§ ^^^5 fiw > cp 0)^3 g p 31c"c3 3 « cdja43J3 FS^'o
* * * ^ * # *
86
05 O
as en
g OOQ oo o ooo o o o o oo
oi p p o p p oqp oq Sa p p pp 5 H rl Tf'tD t* |> CO t6 id CO* B Q* HH o ot»0(ooioNoo^oooHcocooonowooNono cm
in in to ^ CM » t£CM t~ 00 in
1
CO rH i-H tj*co* CO* CO*
8& oiooohOHoo oooooooooo o oooooo po
i£ "3 cxNoptqpoqop pinpinpppppp o ooqowo oq
a Tj<oio6<Noo6c3co'od ood^i>e<iTt<otdrHtd id oiodoocoo ooo
fe'S (NC0iO(NOOINC0moOO'tWC0mWWT)itO03OHW5DC0N00O05O
S-5 t^cMcop^inoo^toc^ ea oo^ i-h eft ppoo^c^ 't ^J, nhcow to^m
CM* CM* CO* id" CM* r-TCO Of CO^f^CO'cMr-* CO* >0 ^**tD* iH
Ss <n « «
8& o oo omoo o o
»s o op ocopo o p
* 2. to tjW otototo cm oi
*-s oooooai^ooooooototoo^oooooomoooooooo s.s oo ^i1^ os
h P^*-j>
co © **i
u a Csf iO i-T C0*m*i-* CM* Mi
oomcocoomooooinot^oinoirtmmoasoiOomt-inoo OTt|05^ooo^opowciOi>ooqc>qt>t>oqc^oot>poi>pt>pp
"32^ © ©cm ©* rA as £• oi »d ©odac4 1* © t* as of©* «h io ad rn £• en oo t» su ©' ad
Sb-5 ^r-IC^OTHCOOOcOCOC^COCOtOi-HtDtOt-llOCOlOOKNT^OoOlOtntDlOtO
"5fi lOl>C^OOCOO'^(NC^t>tO(NCO<N05<NCSI05^^COC^CO^D'-HOiCOi-Hi--lc<l
OooO
jy tH HlflHOOHW tH CD iH rH rH i-i CM rH C4 rH
i
t- ooooooooooooomoooomooomooooooooo
>, p<NOpppoiqpopopi>ppiLqpc<jppp(Nppopppppo £
£ "2 «>' co co o o d as r-I ai <* oo <n co co co rt< o' as in tj< to to r-I co' as cm co to' i> cm' "*' <n ih
— 5 TfCOCMl>COC<lCOrHTt<>q00T}<^TfiOtOTfCOC^tO[>in00COasosCDtOrHC^^C<l #o-? i-H>mCMCM00 rt< tH t£ CO CM CO ^ i-i <N -<t CM l> tO m CO r-t rH Tf CO
ip
g oooTf^Homiflooooooiflo^ooooooot-oooooo '"'
• , qiq^iNcooJOKNcooooqcoinwin^owioooooooowooooo j-fa
& lO CO iH id to CO as O* CO CM 00 oo co" 00 00 00 CO rK© i-5 id CO to' t> rf ,-h ^ id 00 <N <N <N b0
kg t> i-i to in to co tm oo cm rf to co as o oo rn lo cm cm to o m o "* ^ t> co i> oo i-h co co p
g g co^eq w i-h i-h to^tqo in in <n m t> w ppoo^c- t> t> in rp o "<t rn cm oq^oo^oo p,^ o
-Sco co*o*co*i-H*inco*to*c>*T}* cm* r-T to* co* 3?<n*o* i>i> V^i*th* oo* tj* oo* cm*of ^fi-Tcm* cm* 05*t>* J3 r-J iHi-)t-ItH CO COiHtH iH iH t-4 ig
oooomiNOooooooooinmooooinooinooooooom 2|
g ppc^ininppopopopinr-jpqpppinpoppopoqpoopp
£ k. oi oo rH i> co i> ^' <n oo to <n' c<i *5 i-ICOrH<N^OOOOOOI>in0d0 <0n5oToH^O'Octo'>i0-i^i-ti>oit>c^COt>CrO-iionti>n0o0 "'t "*t to t> ^ -<* i> 05tOCOT}<t^i-H
t»,c oq^w roco oo^m -<* <© oo t^ o h t^c^qto o <o ^rlt> w~txc
i "^ to i-^i-i oo^o^ co in ^
« o in*<N*r}* ^*05*Tj*oo*i-*oT<N*rH*<N*in p* m*co* oTc^* ^* co* <n* (N* idc<f <N*co*t>*c^* co*<n* cm*oT 8
1
0)
P.
87
£ ooo o o ooo oo p 8 3 OOO O O 0*0000 oi
w£2 cb co 00 cb cb 00 *o tf 06 «g OOOt-OONOO^OOOOOMOOOOHHONOOOOOOOOOOO — .2 copc^ tH q lctto oo <n
5 of of co h«oh i-T
8£ 0O0O Oo 0O0O 0O0P Pt>
fa g CO Oi IO CDOJ t>OI
>>.£ OOONOOOOIOOOOO^CQOOOODO
ofof Tf so of to
EbS
OOOOOOt-OShOOOOO
M00O0O0"0O«Q0MWOOOOOOHWH^C0OfflOHOOmOOt»OOW OJppOjC00iI>C000ppOO000qt>Tt< Olt>rHppCDOOOIi-lOCDOOI>
B 8 ^ oi rH lo oi 10 00 iH05«oc6odcob-d oTua oi co 10 10 d ^ cb oi 00 <<* t> oi
2 a£ 05 O CDOi CO CD OC0 O 1-1 OJOO COO0 Ol OilOCOCO CD U0C0OiCOi-HTjH|>t>rH CO Ol 00 «5 c co^'~l t£
i,ci>
l>
; ,~l to HqN03>coK^qoiwwioti
Ti|
iHqoK^HH 00^a i> m 00 wh
S'S g r> co"t>^H©* rHio^r>Thi>irfofofof'*f ufcooo"ofiHco~o*i>co~ofcfiHTt<o''of
-iJo 1^ rH OJ T-H Tf t> IO T^ O iH CO Tjn rH t> t> rH 00 t> Oi I> O t> T}< 00 t> OI t> tH C0 Oi t-
.g O w CO Hi-1 r-l Ol 1—I i-l OI r-l r-
!
Ebb
s&
OOOOiOO^OOOOOOCOOiOOOOOOOOOiOiOnrO-ilOii-CHit>OCOOOOOtODHOOOiOOOOitf>lOJOOOOOOOOOOOO Oi
jH
„ o"
iHiHtHCOtI'OSCOiHiH tHOI OI 00 OI CO CO CO (NIOWt)<t|<H cqOl *ow w
c
I 8 O0iOO01OOOOOOOOOOOr^OC0>O"<*rHOOOOi0OI>r*OO
o OOiLOO^OCDOOOOOiOOOOOOCOOJCOOJLOOOOOiO'-lOOOiO ,X5
fa & 00' CO O 00 00 o' r}5 O 00* IOtH 00 © oi Oi O" i-5 00 t^ rH tK Oi Oi CD ©' CO COOl' Oi COHri W)
h C tH OI rf [- i-l O CO 00 00 Oi OI tF Oi W *# i-l OI O OI W Oi tH OI CO l> «<* r-l CO CO CO OI TC P
g g t> '"tf Oi^CDO^l> CO IO "# O^CO^CXDOO^OO CM O^O^TjjO^CO OIO^O^CO ^TfH uo 00 0^*0 o
CO i-TeO"^of^r-T ufCO* 00 ofwCO~rH^ofofCD o"lO*rMrHCfofl> Ofuf J3
2" CO rHr-l tH r-l HHINHH rH ^ o
Oi OiOiOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOiOTfiOOOOOOOOoOO tH OCOOOOOOOOOOOOlOOiOOOO^O^T^OOlOOOOOOOOI
cu _S r-l CO lO CO LO (N lO Oi rH OI Oi Oi OI i-H lO OI US CO t> t> ^ lO CD O "<tf rf O CO ^ i-i »0 ^ jQ
•ry lO r-l i—ItJ CMi—I HIM T-irHOI iHtHiHtHtH iH r-l r-l p
2 rH C
eZ 0)
bx) tx v S . 1
Sal Ss J f -alg-a &8-0 I J
f !.-§§ niiifll |1 2'l«^lll1 ii ll §1 b| 9 el-i I I
w° SrSSSEEEOOr^rt.PHrtlpL.&HKtfKtf^ . * ***** *
88
T-taooTfcoT*inoi>
OJ OI O (N t> 00 in Oi CO
^' a> co co" Tp co ai oS o t>OOCOi-linOT}<0
00 in o^w «h co rM cn in
l> ©*iH<xfCD CO tO 00 iH
rHTfcoino^intxNco
ll
8 S 88
»"3 OJ O COO
«
oooomooi
©S
000000000000000000
CNJ to rf O 00 <N O* "tf CO
TF "^ l> 00 tN T»< <N ^
Of l> "**
CO
II 8 fa
si
11
moooocoooooo CO l>
-8 CD id 005
t>co
co'
3 oi
OoOoCiD>OoIcOoOqO<IN
in co oi o4 oi 1> r-J
l> OI t> O CO CM O
00^ co i> th 00 in <n
ofco"of t> n?o*" co'
CM Ttf CO CO OI CN OI
lb
•o 5©
I
i©
000^00000 p p p cnj in p q o p
t> oi co' Tt* t> t>" in co' co'
cocoTf^i>T}<ooi-iin
«Tt* i> -^ a 01 m <n 01
jhoT ofooofkOiHol
OI
s
9 ^OOOINIOO .pppinoqoip
CO* CO CO* OI O* I> ?h" co'
o o i> 10 in co 00 1>
OTf<N"in^inco*'of
CO iH iH
Ojrn-^jopoOoppopopoCoN
co co' o* t}< co in in o' ai
oinc»i>coininooco wino »-i o co in 01 oi
co"'co*coco"Wi>co"co"'co"
tN CO OJ
in OJ
<N CO
06 S5 1—
1
t^
CD OJ
of n
Ci
e*
8
d)
CP
apo
^3
gO « Sifts a a.Sfr^
1
cu a
89
REPRESENTATION OF INDIGENTS
Private counsel are appointed to represent indigent defend-ants
in twenty-eight of the State's judicial districts. In the 12th
and 18th judicial districts (Cumberland, Hoke, and Guilford
counties) indigents are normally represented by the public de-fender's
office. Although the rules governing entitlement to
counsel were the same during the 1969-70 and 1970-71 fiscal
years, the costs of the program increased from $1,171,933.54 to
$1,626,335.38 or 38.8%. This program constituted 7.4% of total
Judicial Department expenditures in 1970-71. The costs of the
program in 1970-71 are summarized as follows:
Assigned Counsel in Criminal Cases $1,341,722.86
Assigned Counsel in Juvenile Cases 63,690.53
$1,405,413.39
Public Defender's Office in
12th Judicial District 61,366.98
Public Defender's Office in
18th Judicial District 80,845.23
142,212.21
Transcripts, Records and Briefs 77,344.78
Expert Witness Fees 1,365.00
TOTAL $1,626,355.38
The table at the end of this section compares the assigned
counsel program in 1969-70 and 1970-71. The number of cases
assigned rose from 7,426 to 9,179 or 23.6% and expenditures
rose from $1,055,818 to $1,405,413 or 33.1%.
Court appearances represent only a part of the activity of
the public defenders, but the numbers do reflect the high level
of activity in both of these offices
:
1971 Court Appearances
12th District 18th Disrtict
District Court 634 649
Superior Court 322 438
Appellate Courts 10 17
The total cost of providing counsel to indigents in the two
districts with public defenders was as follows:
12th District 18th District
Public Defender $61,366.98 $ 80,845.23
Assigned Counsel 18,470,00 20,280.00
$79,836.98 $101,125.23
It is instructive to compare these costs with the costs of the
program in other urban areas: 10th District (Wake) $87,-
250.60, 14th District (Durham) $92,182.00, 21st District (For-syth)
$64,369.13, and 26th District (Mecklenburg) $174,807.56.
90
When private counsel or the public defender is assigned to
represent an indigent, the court sets the money value of services
rendered and enters judgment against the defendant for such
amount. Receipts from payments on these judgments rose from
$26,414.88 in 1969-70 to $37,692.73 in 1970-71. Receipts in 1970-
71 amounted to 2.3% of the total cost of the indigent defendant
program.
ASSIGNED COUNSEL
Cases and Expenditures
1ST DISTRICT
Camden
Chowan
Currituck
Dare
Gates
Pasquotank
Perquimans
TOTAL
2ND DISTRICT
Beaufort
Hyde
Martin
Tyrrell
Washington
TOTAL
3RD DISTRICT
Carteret
Craven
Pamlico
Pitt
TOTAL
4TH DISTRICT
Duplin
Jones
Onslow
Sampson
TOTAL
5TH DISTRICT
New Hanover
Pender
TOTAL
6TH DISTRICT
Bertie
Halifax
Hertford
Northampton
TOTAL
CASES EXPENDITURES
Percent
1969-70 1970-71 1969-70 1970-71 Increase
9 4 1,175 1,036 (11.8)
22 30 2,600 3,814 46.7
3 4 300 300
2 7 225 1,261 460.4
5 4 525 525
28 41 3,280 6,288 91.7
10 4 1,550 350 (77.4)
79 94 9,655 13,574 40.6
52 65 5,120 7,940 55.1
4 4 1,500 350 (76.7)
26 52 2,170 8,870 308.8
3 10 345 1,310 279.7
23 14 2,705 1,095 (59.5)
108 145 11,840 19,565 65.2
53 68 5,605 8,435 50.5
69 137 9,030 17,435 93.1
5 7 560 840 50.0
183 211 19,570 34,987 78.8
310 423 34,765 61,697 77.5
49 38 4,912 6,625 34.9
6 8 800 1,203 50.4
69 97 9,160 14,050 53.4
45 66 4,760 8,800 84.9
169 209 19,632 30,678 56.3
241 244 29,135 24,396 (16.3)
28 38 2,785 4,378 57.2
269 282 31,920 28,774 ( 9.9)
32 22 3,314 2,350 (29.1)
95 125 9,044 15,528 71.7
19 27 1,365 2,445 79.1
18 30 3,428 4,207 22.7
164 204 17,151 24,530 43.0
91
CASES
1969-70 1970-71
7TH DISTRICT
Edgecombe 88 112
Nash 107 121
Wilson 135 155
TOTAL 330 388
8TH DISTRICT
Greene 15 16
Lenoir 70 99
Wayne 69 210
TOTAL 154 325
9TH DISTRICT
Franklin 54 76
Granville 38 48
Person 32 54
Vance 43 101
Warren 25 17
TOTAL 192 296
10TH DISTRICT
Wake 385 578
11TH DISTRICT
Harnett 45 50
Johnston 43 82
Lee 27 37
TOTAL 115 169
12TH DISTRICT
Cumberland 258 64
Hoke 15 3
TOTAL 273 67
13TH DISTRICT
Bladen 37 69
Brunswick 26 17
Columbus 81 82
TOTAL 144 168
14TH DISTRICT
Durham 332 572
15TH DISTRICT
Alamance 149 126
Chatham 28 35
Orange 69 116
TOTAL 246 277
16TH DISTRICT
Robeson 176 213
Scotland 88 127
TOTAL 264 340
EXPENDITURES
1969-70 1970-71
Percent
Increase
10,310
22,004
17,648
17,452
25,241
23,143
69.3
14.7
31.1
49,962 65,836 31.8
2,035
9,890
8,465
1,130
13,185
24,578
(44.5)
33.3
190.3
20,390 38,893 90.7
8,682
4,450
3,680
6,295
2,875
15,353
7,355
7,835
12,205
2,841
76.8
65.3
112.9
93.9
( 1.2)
25,982 45,589 75.5
54,171 87,271 61.1
6,500
8,150
3,095
8,493
17,625
5,750
30.7
116.3
85.8
17,745 31,868 79.6
47,110
2,225
17,670
800
(62.5)
(64.0)
49,335 18,470 (62.6)
2,880
4,070
8,415
11,335
4,775
10,902
293.6
17.3
29.6
15,365 27,012 75.8
61,617 92,182 49.6
25,743
3,815
11,785
17,950
3,980
20,408
(30.3)
4.3
73.2
41,343 42,338 2.4
26,082
9,469
32,371
14,588
24.1
54.1
35,551 46,959 32.1
92
17TH DISTRICT
Caswell
Rockingham
Stokes
Surry
TOTAL
18TH DISTRICT
Guilford
19TH DISTRICT
Cabarrus
Montgomery
Randolph
Rowan
TOTAL
20TH DISTRICT
Anson
Moore
Richmond
Stanly
Union
TOTAL
21ST DISTRICT
Forsyth
22ND DISTRICT
Alexander
Davidson
Davie
Iredell
TOTAL
23RD DISTRICT
Alleghany
Ashe
Wilkes
Yadkin
TOTAL
24TH DISTRICT
Avery
Madison
Mitchell
Watauga
Yancey
TOTAL
25TH DISTRICT
Burke
Caldwell
Catawba
TOTAL
CASES
1969-70 1970-71
EXPENDITURES
1969-70 1970-71
Percent
Increase
11
64
8
35
41
180
10
47
1,200
8,485
1,050
5,875
6,124
28,148
1,050
8,486
410.3
231.7
44.4
118 278 16,610 43,808 163.7
502 65 87,430 20,280 (76.8)
179
41
67
68
157
35
72
126
20,134
4,360
7,863
9,275
16,675
3,265
7,755
17,053
(17.2)
(25.1)
( 1.4)
83.9
355 390 41,632 44,748 7.5
30
45
137
62
90
53
54
122
84
79
4,555
4,145
15,765
6,210
10,455
6,205
6,810
14,368
15,165
11,390
36.2
64.3
( 8.9)
144.2
8.9
364 392 41,130 53,938 31.1
333 329 56,191 64,369 14.6
7
81
15
41
15
127
18
88
915
14,225
2,770
5,150
1,430
25,481
3,435
11,553
56.3
79.1
24.0
124.3
144 248 23,060 41,899 81.7
6
13
37
7
10
21
70
23
800
1,485
5,700
800
1,125
2,375
11,620
4,745
40.6
59.9
103.9
493.1
63 124 8,785 19,865 126.1
12
15
6
36
10
21
39
16
29
12
2,635
2,840
555
6,505
715
2,400
5,995
3,050
4,500
1,175
( 8.9)
111.1
449.5
(30.8)
64.3
79 117 13,250 17,120 29.2
93
98
134
104
122
193
14,035
13,065
22,634
15,763
23,359
34,289
12.3
78.8
51.5
325 419 49,734 73,411 47.6
93
CASES
1969-70 1970-71
26TH DISTRICT
Mecklenburg 482 953
27TH DISTRICT
Cleveland 162 138
Gaston 316 303
Lincoln 38 47
TOTAL 516 488
28TH DISTRICT
Buncombe 240 431
29TH DISTRICT
Henderson 83 100
McDowell 43 28
Polk 43 15
Rutherford 68 63
Transylvania 27 29
TOTAL 264 235
30TH DISTRICT
Cherokee 20 13
Clay 5 1
Graham 2 3
Haywood 41 89
Jackson 23 32
Macon 7 14
Swain 9 21
TOTAL 107 173
GRAND TOTAL 7,426 9,179
EXPENDITURES
1969-70 1970-71
Percent
Increase
85,907 174,808 103.5
19,008
36,690
3,715
20,635
45,666
6,285
8.6
24.5
69.2
59,413 72,586 22.2
30,663 50,673 65.3
10,040
5,375
5,213
6,766
2,715
10,037
2,545
2,360
8,736
4,215
(52.7)
(54.7)
29.1
55.2
30,109 27,893 ( 7.4)
3,775
650
800
6,340
2,045
1,400
470
15,480
2,350
75
550
11,655
5,040
2,175
2,940
24,785
(37.7)
(88.5)
(31.3)
83.8
146.5
55.5
525.5
60.1
$1,055,818 $1,405,413 33.1
94
TABLE I
THE COURTS COMMISSION
1971
Senator J. Ruffin BAiLEY-C/imn.
Raleigh
Rep. Herschel S. Harkins
Asheville
Senator J. J. Harrington
Lewiston
Rep. Sneed High
Fayetteville
Mr. Herbert L. Hyde
Asheville
Mr. Wilbur M. Jolly
Louisburg
Dean J. D. Phillips
School of Law
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill
Rep. Kenneth C. Royall, Jr.
Durham
Rep. H. Horton Rountree
Greenville
Rep. W. Marcus Short
Greensboro
Mr. Lindsay C. Warren, Jr.
Goldsboro
Mr. R. Lane Brown, III
Albemarle
Ex Officio Members:
Mr. Bert M. MONTAGUE-Director
Administrative Office of the Courts
Raleigh
Mr. C. W. Teague
North Carolina State Bar
Raleigh
Mr. Herbert H. Taylor, Jr.
North Carolina Bar Association
Tarboro
TABLE II
THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL
1971
Justice Carlisle W. HiGGiNS-C/imn.
Raleigh
Mr. W. Marion Allen
Elkin
Senator Julian R. Allsbrook
Roanoke Rapids
Judge Julius L. Banzet
Warrenton
Judge Hugh B. Campbell
Raleigh
Judge Thomas D. Cooper, Jr.
Burlington
Judge Sam J. Ervin, III
Morganton
Judge Henry A. McKinnon, Jr.
Lumberton
Mr. Thomas W. Moore, Jr.
Winston-Salem
Rep. James E. Ramsey
Roxboro
Mr. Mdllard R. Rich, Jr.
Assistant Attorney General of N. C.
Raleigh
Mr. W. D. Sabiston, Jr.
Carthage
Mr. Bonner D. Sawyer
Hillsborough
Mr. John K. Smart, Jr.
Brevard
Senator Wdlliam W. Staton
Sanford
Mr. Wdlliam E. Timberlake
Lumberton
Mr. Charles B. Winberry
Rocky Mount
Mr. Frank W. Bullock,