News from the South - North Carolina News Feed

Juvenile offenders often denied parole in NC prisons even as adults

Published

3 months ago

April 26, 2025

carolinapublicpress.org – Lucas Thomae – 2025-04-26 00:00:00

by Lucas Thomae, Carolina Public Press
April 26, 2025

A decade after a federal judge ordered North Carolina to adopt a plan to give juvenile offenders serving life sentences a “meaningful opportunity” for parole, a lawsuit making its way through the court system says the state has failed to follow through.

Earlier this month a judge denied the state’s motion to dismiss the suit, which was filed in 2023, noting “concerning” accounts of omitted and false information in plaintiff Brett Abrams’ parole file.

Abrams, 56, is serving a life sentence for murder at the minimum security prison in Hillsborough. He leaves prison five days a week to work a full-time job at a meat packing plant. In his 40 years of incarceration, he’s accrued 11 infractions, the last being in 2005.

On paper, he seems like a great candidate for parole. But the four-person commission that has sole discretion over parole decisions in North Carolina has denied him every time since he first became eligible in 1993.

Abrams has undergone two parole reviews since the state implemented its new process for juvenile offenders — colloquially known as the “Hayden Plan” for the case Hayden v. Keller that spurred its creation.

However, he continues to be denied his freedom.

A brutal killing

In 1983, Abrams stabbed and killed his 20-year old neighbor at her parents’ home after she confronted him for secretly watching her sunbathe. Abrams was 14 at the time of the slaying, and at 15 he was charged as an adult and sentenced to life imprisonment after pleading guilty to second-degree murder.

Depositions from Abrams’ lawsuit revealed his parole file had omitted crucial information that might have helped with his release. It also contained inaccurate information, including that he had an open homicide case against him for the 1982 death of his brother. In reality, the Iredell County Sheriffs’ Office had ruled the death an accident and closed the case.

“We saw in his profile pretty significant, very material mistakes that included misleading information, lies, things that were simply not true which we believe are so significant that it’s a sort of evidence in itself that the system is broken,” Abrams’ attorney, Jake Sussman, told Carolina Public Press.

And despite Abrams seeking psychological counseling and treatment based on the recommendation of the Parole Commission in 2018, those records were not included in his 2020 review.

“One would assume accurate and comprehensive summaries with relevant information would be essential where commissioners vote on more than 100 cases a day,” Judge Richard Myers wrote in his April 2 ruling.

The court cannot reverse the decisions made by the state’s Parole Commission, meaning the legality of Abrams’ continued incarceration is not being questioned. But Myers determined it is “within this court’s purview to review for Eighth Amendment violations,” as proven in Hayden v. Keller.

“What we’ve asked the judge to do is to find that the current system is unconstitutional as it applies to Mr. Abrams, and therefore as it would apply to all of the juvenile offenders, and develop a plan to actually have a review process that works,” Sussman said.

Juvenile offenders at mercy of the system

Decades of judicial rulings have given states plenty of discretion over how to handle the parole process.

North Carolina’s system has changed several times, and starting in 1994 the state eliminated parole altogether in favor of a different system called “structured sentencing,” which sets a minimum sentence and allows the Parole Commission to set the terms of release for felons once they reach that mark.

Those imprisoned prior to 1994 are still subject to the state’s older system, which Sussman described as a “constitutional mess,” particularly for juvenile offenders.

Two U.S. Supreme Court decisions from the 2010s — Graham v. Florida and Miller v. Alabama — resulted in monumental changes for people serving life sentences due to crimes they committed as juveniles. In those rulings, the Supreme Court severely limited states’ abilities to administer life sentences without parole to juvenile offenders, deciding that such actions constituted “cruel and unusual punishment” under the Eighth Amendment.

The logic behind that ruling is that juvenile offenders are more likely to respond to rehabilitation and reform compared to people imprisoned for crimes they committed later in life.

“Research in the area of brain development shows that the brain is not fully developed until about age 25,” explained Erin Fitzgerald, a professor at Elon University who specializes in juvenile justice. “This lack of development makes juveniles more impulsive, susceptible to peer pressure and unable to fully appreciate the consequences of their actions. However, it also makes them more malleable and capable of rehabilitation.”

Justice for juvenile offenders

The Hayden Plan at the center of Abrams’ lawsuit was born out of the precedent set by the Graham and Miller cases.

In 2010, a North Carolina inmate serving a life sentence for sexual assaults he committed as a teenager in the 1980s sued the Parole Commission for not giving him a fair chance to make his case for release.

His name was Shaun Hayden.

Every year after becoming eligible for parole, Hayden would receive the same letter from the commission saying that he had been denied parole, despite never having interacted with them in any way or being notified that he was up for review.

“He didn’t think that was fair, and he was correct,” said Ben Finholt, who was one of Hayden’s attorneys in his lawsuit against the commission. “It was a sham parole system where (the commission) never talked to anyone. They just review documents every year, and if not much changes, then you just get denied every year without them ever talking to you.”

A District Court ruled in Hayden’s favor, citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Graham v. Florida. The state lost its appeal and in 2018 was directed to implement a new plan for handling parole review for juvenile offenders.

That plan guaranteed juvenile offenders a 30-minute video conference with one of the commissioners, a specialized case analyst and, in the case of denial, a letter detailing why the inmate was denied parole and recommendations for future reviews.

New parole plan, old issues

The new plan hasn’t exactly led to substantive changes, however.

Finholt, who now serves as Abrams’ attorney for his parole review (separate from the lawsuit that Sussman is handling), has had a firsthand account of the Hayden Plan’s shortcomings.

“The parole case analyst in Brett’s case admitted under oath that she did not consider the advocacy letter that I wrote for Brett in 2020, that it was not part of the record and that she had made no changes to her process based on the fact that the person being considered for parole was a juvenile,” he said. “That is explicitly contrary to (the Hayden court’s) holding that people who were kids at the time of the crime are entitled constitutionally to a different process.”

That was one of the reasons Myers, the judge in Abrams’ lawsuit, denied the state’s motion to dismiss the suit.

However, Myers also wrote that it is “still unclear” based on the facts of the case whether the commissioners would have changed their decision on Abrams if the information in his file had been completely accurate.

He declined to rule in favor of either party and ordered more discovery on the matter. When that is completed in June, he may issue a final ruling or set a trial date.

Sussman said that if Abrams wins this lawsuit, he would advocate for a decision-making process that is less arbitrary, such as a rubric or points-based system.

Finholt has also advocated for such a change, and he said it makes sense regardless of people’s opinions regarding parole.

“My personal feeling, based on my long professional experience, is that most of the folks who are up for parole would do just fine outside of prison,” he said. “However, even if you’re a person who disagrees with me on that front, you should still dislike the current process because it’s not informed by any evidence or any data.

“If you’re the kind of person who thinks that most folks should stay inside, you should also be horrified by the fact that these release decisions are being made essentially on people’s guts.”

This article first appeared on Carolina Public Press and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

The post Arrest of Wisconsin judge ‘escalation’ in Trump-judiciary conflict, Democrats warn appeared first on tennesseelookout.com

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

The content presents a case focused on the rights of juvenile offenders, specifically in relation to parole decisions. The emphasis on rehabilitation, fairness in parole processes, and concerns over the accuracy and fairness of the system reflects a more progressive, or center-left, perspective. It advocates for juvenile offenders’ opportunity for parole based on their potential for reform, which aligns with broader left-leaning views on criminal justice reform and the belief in rehabilitation over punitive measures. The inclusion of legal cases like Graham v. Florida and Miller v. Alabama suggests an alignment with the idea of justice for juvenile offenders in line with constitutional protections. While the tone is not overtly political, the framing of the issues reflects concerns typically associated with progressive criminal justice reform.

Up Next

‘Our Wave’ Co-founder on support spaces for sexual assault survivors

Don't Miss

Mental health pros worry about possible cuts to 988 hotline funding

News from the South - North Carolina News Feed

What is Chronic Venous Insufficiency? Will Trump be okay?

Published

6 hours ago

July 18, 2025

Staff Editor

www.youtube.com – WRAL – 2025-07-18 12:56:16

SUMMARY: President Trump has been diagnosed with chronic venous insufficiency, a common condition in people over 70 causing leg swelling due to blood pooling in veins. The White House confirmed no deep vein thrombosis, arterial disease, or heart issues were found, with normal cardiac function and no signs of systemic illness. Despite visible ankle swelling and bruised hands, attributed to frequent handshaking and aspirin use, the president remains in excellent health and experiences no discomfort. At 79, he stays active, working continuously. The White House emphasized these symptoms are minor and consistent with his busy public engagements and cardiovascular prevention measures.

Swollen legs led to President Donald Trump being diagnosed with what’s called chronic venous insufficiency. It’s a fairly common condition among older adults but requires a thorough checkup to rule out more serious causes of swelling in the legs. Here are some things to know.

Chronic venous insufficiency, or CVI, happens when veins in the legs can’t properly carry blood back to the heart. That can lead to blood pooling in the lower legs. In addition to swelling, usually around the feet and ankles, symptoms can include legs that are achy, heavy feeling or tingly, and varicose veins. Severe cases could trigger leg sores known as ulcers.

WRAL App: https://www.wral.com/download-wral-apps/5787234/
The Latest Weather: https://www.wral.com/weather/page/1010362/

News Tips:
Online – https://www.wral.com/report-it/
Email – assignmentdesk@wral.com

Subscribe to WRAL:
https://youtube.com/c/wral5

Follow WRAL:
Facebook: https://facebook.com/WRALTV
X: https://twitter.com/WRAL
IG: https://instagram.com/wral

About WRAL-TV:

WRAL is your Raleigh, North Carolina news source. Check out our videos for the latest news in Raleigh, local sports, Raleigh weather, and more at https://WRAL.com
#localnews #northcarolina

Source

News from the South - North Carolina News Feed

US House votes to yank funding for NPR, PBS, foreign aid, sending bill to Trump’s desk

Published

13 hours ago

July 18, 2025

Staff Editor

ncnewsline.com – Jennifer Shutt – 2025-07-18 05:46:00

SUMMARY: On July 2, 2025, the U.S. House approved legislation to cancel $9 billion in previously authorized spending on public broadcasting and foreign aid, marking only the second time in over 30 years Congress approved a presidential rescissions request. The 216-213 mostly party-line vote sends the bill to President Donald Trump for signature. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting will lose $1.1 billion in funding for NPR, PBS, and local stations. The bill also cuts $8 billion in foreign aid but protects HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and maternal health programs. This follows Senate approval with some adjustments and reflects the White House’s push to focus spending on American interests.

Read the full article

The post US House votes to yank funding for NPR, PBS, foreign aid, sending bill to Trump’s desk appeared first on ncnewsline.com

News from the South - North Carolina News Feed

Missing voter information the objection of NC search

Published

23 hours ago

July 17, 2025

Staff Editor

carolinapublicpress.org – Sarah Michels – 2025-07-17 14:07:00

by Sarah Michels, Carolina Public Press
July 17, 2025

North Carolina State Board of Elections Executive Director Sam Hayes is setting off on a mission to correct 103,000 North Carolinians’ voting records from which some information is missing.

He maintains that the process, dubbed the Registration Repair Project, will not remove any eligible voters from the state’s voter rolls.

According to the state elections board, 103,270 North Carolina registered voters have records that lack either their driver’s license number, the last four digits of their Social Security number or an indication that they have neither.

Last year, this missing information became the stuff of headlines, lawsuits and the high-profile election protest of Republican Court of Appeals Judge Jefferson Griffin, who lost his bid for state Supreme Court to the incumbent justice, Democrat Allison Riggs, by 734 votes.

In April, the North Carolina Supreme Court declined to remove ballots from the count based on missing identification numbers; they said the state elections board, not voters, was responsible for a faulty voter registration form that didn’t make it abundantly clear that this information was required.

While Griffin lost, the issue he raised remains salient for a newly Republican elections board and the U.S. Department of Justice, which promptly sued the state board over alleged violations of the federal Help America Vote Act’s voter registration provisions.

Thursday, Hayes told reporters that a process he unveiled in late June to gather these missing identification numbers had begun in earnest.

“We must put this issue behind us so we can focus our attention squarely on preparations for accurate and secure municipal elections this fall,” he said.

The plan to collect missing information

There are two groups of voters under Hayes’ plan.

The first group includes registered voters who have never provided a driver’s license, the last four digits of their Social Security number or an affirmation that they lack both. The state elections board has asked county election boards to check their records for these numbers, in case they were provided but not correctly entered into the voting system.

In early August, the state elections board will send letters to the remaining voters in this group requesting the missing information. If affected voters do not comply, they will vote provisionally in future elections. The elections board will create a flag on these voters’ records for poll workers.

The second group includes registered voters whose records do not show that they’ve provided an identification number, but have shown additional documentation at the polls proving their identity and eligibility under HAVA. These voters may vote a regular ballot.

However, the elections board will still send them a letter in a second mailing asking for the missing identification number to bolster the state’s voter records. Even so, if they do not oblige, they still will not be at risk of being disenfranchised, NCSBE General Counsel Paul Cox said.

County election boards have already made progress, and their work will continue as the mailings go out, Hayes said.

Voters can check to see whether they’re on the list of those with missing information by using the Registration Repair Search Tool. If voters don’t want to wait for the August mailing, they can submit an updated voter registration form using their driver’s license through the online DMV portal or visit their county elections board in person with their driver’s license or Social Security card.

“We anticipate the number of voters on the list will decrease quickly as word spreads about this important effort,” Hayes said.

The State Board of Elections unanimously approved the plan last month, despite some concerns from Democrat Jeff Carmon about putting up an extra obstacle for voters because of a problem with missing information that the voters didn’t cause.

“It’s hard to understand starvation if you’ve never felt the pangs of hunger,” Carmon said. “It’s the same situation with voting obstacles. Your perspective of an obstacle may not be the same as someone who’s consistently had their identity and their validity questioned.”

Nonetheless, Carmon and fellow Democrat board member Siobhan Millen ultimately voted in support of the plan.

Same ballot, different rules

Normally, when a voter casts a provisional ballot, the county elections board determines whether their ballot counts by the post-election canvass, held nine days after an election.

Voters may have to provide documentation or information to prove their eligibility to vote in order to be accepted.

The same process applies to the 103,000 affected voters, with a catch. Their vote may be accepted for federal contests, but not state contests, due to a difference in law.

According to the DOJ’s interpretation, the National Voter Registration Act requires all provisional votes of “duly registered voters” to count, Cox said.

But the state elections board has interpreted the state Supreme Court and North Carolina Court of Appeals’ decisions in the Griffin case as requiring a driver’s license, the last four digits of a Social Security number or an affirmation that a voter has neither before accepting their votes in state and local contests.

Under a recent election law change, county election boards have three days to validate and count or reject provisional ballots.

But sometimes, mismatches happen during validation due to database trouble with reading hyphenated names or connecting maiden and married names, for example, Cox said. The board has designed a “fail safe” in case this comes up.

When there’s a mismatch during the validation process, state law allows voters to provide additional documentation — like a driver’s license, bank statement or government document with a voter’s name and address — to prove their eligibility.

“A big chunk of these voters will have already shown HAVA ID, and that’s because in the past, when this information was not supplied, the county boards would still require these voters to show that alternative form of HAVA ID when they voted for the first time,” Cox said.

Poll workers will ask provisional voters to provide this additional documentation so that they can mark it down for later, if validation doesn’t work, he added.

Democrats threaten countersuit

Last week, the Democratic National Committee threatened the state board with litigation if they went ahead with their plan regarding those with missing information.

The letter claimed that the plan would remove eligible voters from the rolls illegally.

Hayes disagrees. In his view, he’s just following the law.

“It’s not the fault of the voters,” he said. “But at the same time, we’re required by the law to go back and collect this information, which should have been done at the time, and it certainly should have been done in the intervening time.”

He also clarified that North Carolina’s photo voter ID requirement won’t suffice for the impacted voters. They still have to vote provisionally so that their identification numbers can go through the validation process, he said.

As for whether his fully fleshed out plan will appease the DNC?

“We hope so,” Hayes said.

This article first appeared on Carolina Public Press and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

The post Missing voter information the objection of NC search appeared first on carolinapublicpress.org

Political Bias Rating: Centrist

This article presents a balanced and factual report on North Carolina’s voter registration issue, focusing on the administrative process and legal context without overt editorializing. It includes perspectives from both Republican and Democratic figures, highlights legal rulings and procedural details, and covers concerns from Democrats alongside the state elections board’s explanations. The language is neutral, aiming to inform about the complexities of voter ID requirements and the Registration Repair Project without endorsing a particular political stance or framing the issue through a partisan lens.