[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-1-en-105":3,"doc-seo-176617-105":53,"doc-detail-176617-en":126},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,14,19,24,29,34,39,44,49],{"id":8,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":11,"show_sort_weight":12,"slug":13},11,1,"Template","Presentations",90,"presentations",{"id":15,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":16,"show_sort_weight":17,"slug":18},12,"Resumes",80,"resumes",{"id":20,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":21,"show_sort_weight":22,"slug":23},14,"Invoices",70,"invoices",{"id":25,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":26,"show_sort_weight":27,"slug":28},15,"Posters",60,"posters",{"id":30,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":31,"show_sort_weight":32,"slug":33},16,"Social Media",50,"social-media",{"id":35,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":36,"show_sort_weight":37,"slug":38},17,"Forms",40,"forms",{"id":40,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":41,"show_sort_weight":42,"slug":43},18,"Letters",30,"letters",{"id":45,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":46,"show_sort_weight":47,"slug":48},21,"Paper Templates",5,"papers-templates",{"id":50,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":51,"show_sort_weight":4,"slug":52},158,"General","general-158",{"code":4,"msg":54,"data":55},"ok",{"site_id":56,"language":57,"slug":58,"title":58,"keywords":59,"description":60,"schema_data":61,"social_meta":119,"head_meta":121,"extra_data":123,"updated_unix":125},105,"en","template_costs-and-fees-motion","","Motion memorandum addressing the constitutionality of North Carolina statutory court-cost categories under N.C. Const. Art. IX, §7 and related due-process and law-of-the-land protections. The defendant challenges specific provisions authorizing court costs in criminal and traffic cases, arguing they violate constitutional limits and, in practice, impose discriminatory burdens on indigent and minority defendants. The memorandum discusses escalating cost-of-court levels, mandatory fees, bail-related jail charges, pretrial release fees, and charges for state and crime-lab services used as part of prosecution.",{"@graph":62,"@context":118},[63,79,101],{"@type":64,"itemListElement":65},"BreadcrumbList",[66,70,73,76],{"item":67,"name":68,"@type":69,"position":9},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":71,"name":10,"@type":69,"position":72},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/",2,{"item":74,"name":41,"@type":69,"position":75},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/letters/",3,{"item":77,"name":58,"@type":69,"position":78},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/template_costs-and-fees-motion/176617/",4,{"url":77,"name":58,"@type":80,"image":81,"author":86,"headline":58,"publisher":89,"fileFormat":92,"inLanguage":57,"description":60,"dateModified":93,"datePublished":94,"encodingFormat":92,"isAccessibleForFree":95,"interactionStatistic":96},"DigitalDocument",{"url":82,"@type":83,"width":84,"height":85},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/template_costs-and-fees-motion/176617.png","ImageObject",442,249,{"name":87,"@type":88},"Mason","Person",{"url":67,"name":90,"@type":91},"DocShare","Organization","application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document","2026-10-18","2026-09-02",true,{"@type":97,"interactionType":98,"userInteractionCount":100},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":99},"ViewAction",9,{"@type":102,"mainEntity":103},"FAQPage",[104,110,114],{"name":105,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":107},"What is the defendant asking the court to do in this motion?","Question",{"text":108,"@type":109},"The defendant moves to preclude the imposition of certain categories of North Carolina court costs, arguing the authorizing statutes are unconstitutional on their face and as applied.","Answer",{"name":111,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":112},"Which constitutional provisions are cited as the basis for the challenge?",{"text":113,"@type":109},"The memorandum cites N.C. Const. Art. IX, §7 and also relies on the defendant’s rights under the law-of-the-land clause of N.C. Const. Art. I, §19.",{"name":115,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What types of court costs and fees does the memorandum describe as part of the burden on defendants?",{"text":117,"@type":109},"It describes escalating “cost of court” assessments and additional mandatory and collateral fees, including fees related to appointed counsel, jail charges tied to pretrial confinement, pretrial release supervision charges, and charges for state or crime-lab services.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":77,"og:type":120,"og:title":58,"og:site_name":90,"og:description":60},"article",{"robots":122,"canonical":77},"index,follow",{"doc_id":124,"site_id":56},176617,1788325025,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":127},{"doc_id":124,"user_id":128,"nickname":87,"user_avatar":129,"doc_module":9,"category_id":40,"category_name":41,"doc_title":58,"doc_description":60,"doc_content":130,"file_id":131,"file_url":132,"file_type":133,"file_size":134,"view_count":100,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":9,"is_downloadable":9,"audit_status":9,"page_count":135,"language":136,"language_code":57,"site_id":56,"html_lang":57,"table_of_contents":137,"faqs":138,"seo_title":139,"seo_description":60,"update_tm":125,"read_time":100},5909887256941,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA\t\t\tIN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE\nDURHAM COUNTY\t\t\t\t\tSUPERIOR COURT DIVISION\nSTATE OF NORTH CAROLINA\t)\t\tMOTION TO PRECLUDE IMPOSITION\n)\t\tOF CERTAIN CATEGORIES OF COURT\nv.\t\t\t)\t \tCOSTS AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL\n)\t\tUNDER N.C. CONST. ART. IX §7, and\n,         \t)\t\tINCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF\ndefendant\t)\t\tLAW\n___________________________________________________________________________\nNOW COMES the defendant, _______ \u001f\u001f\u001f\u001f\u001f\u001f, by and through undersigned counsel, and hereby respectfully moves to preclude the imposition of certain categories of court costs, as more specifically enumerated below, on the ground that the statutory provisions which authorize the imposition of these categories of court costs violate Article IX, Section 7 of the North Carolina Constitution on their face and as applied to the defendant. As a result, the imposition of these costs violate the defendant’s rights under the law of the land clause of Article I, Section 19 of the North Carolina Constitution.  Specifically, defendant objects to the imposition of court costs authorized under the following provisions:  N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-304(a)(2), N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-304(a)(2a), N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-304(a)(2b) (repealed), N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-304(a)(3), N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-304(a)(3a), N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-304(a)(3b), N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-304(a)(4), N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-304(a)(4a), N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-304(a)(4b), N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-304(a)(6), and N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-304(a)(10). In support of this motion, the defendant submits the following memorandum of law:\nNORTH CAROLINA'S ABUSIVE AND CONSTITUTUIONALLY SUSPECT PRACTICE OF INCREASINGLY USING COURT COST ASSESSMENTS AND FEES TO PLACE THE BURDEN OF FUNDING OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM, AND OUR STATE GOVERNMENT, ON THE BACKS OF INDIGENT CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS\nEver since the 2014 events in Ferguson, Missouri, and the subsequent revelation of its shocking misuse of municipal criminal court fees to fund judicial, law enforcement, and other governmental functions, the nation has been alerted to these increasingly common abusive practices within the criminal legal system. The collection of court fines and fees by municipalities to sustain their local governments provide a gross incentive and avenue for abuse, however similar injustices can be found on a statewide level within North Carolina. Unfortunately, in the last several decades the North Carolina General Assembly has placed our state at the forefront of this trend, both by drastically increasing the number and amount of court costs and fees imposed in criminal and traffic cases, and by making it increasingly harder for judges to waive those fees for indigent defendants.\nBefore describing even a portion of the vast landscape of court costs and fees now imposed in criminal cases, it is important to acknowledge one fact that is evident to any judge sitting in the District and Superior Courts of our state in criminal and traffic cases: the defendants who appear in these courts, and upon whom these fees and costs are imposed, are disproportionately poor and minority. Thus, these costs and fees, whatever the motivation of the judge or other court actors who impose them, have a discriminatory impact and are imposed upon that portion of our population that has the least ability to shoulder this financial burden. See, Beth A. Wood, Office of the State Auditor, Performance Audit: Judicial Department - Court Ordered Fines, Fees, and Restitution, 20 (2011), http://www.ncauditor.net/EPSWeb/Reports/Performance /PER2011-7251.pdf (stating that criminal defendants come “from a population often representing the very poorest and most destitute in the state”).\nThe General Assembly has mandated spiraling costs and fees so much so that the absolute minimum court fee -- the \"cost of court\" which any convicted defendant is assessed -- has by itself increased by a staggering amount in the last several decades: in 1995 the District Court \"cost of court\" was $41. Today it is $178. In Supe","cbCaipSsxJQ4OUXO","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaipSsxJQ4OUXO","docx",47417,25,"English","# Motion to Preclude Imposition of Certain Categories of Court Costs as Unconstitutional\n## Enumerated Statutory Provisions and Grounds\n## Discriminatory Impact on Indigent Criminal Defendants\n## Increase in Court Fees and Mandatory Assessments","[{\"question\":\"What is the defendant asking the court to do in this motion?\",\"answer\":\"The defendant moves to preclude the imposition of certain categories of North Carolina court costs, arguing the authorizing statutes are unconstitutional on their face and as applied.\"},{\"question\":\"Which constitutional provisions are cited as the basis for the challenge?\",\"answer\":\"The memorandum cites N.C. Const. Art. IX, §7 and also relies on the defendant’s rights under the law-of-the-land clause of N.C. Const. Art. I, §19.\"},{\"question\":\"What types of court costs and fees does the memorandum describe as part of the burden on defendants?\",\"answer\":\"It describes escalating “cost of court” assessments and additional mandatory and collateral fees, including fees related to appointed counsel, jail charges tied to pretrial confinement, pretrial release supervision charges, and charges for state or crime-lab services.\"}]","template_costs-and-fees-motion | DOCX"]