State v. Taylor
| Decision Date | 17 December 2021 |
| Docket Number | 156PA20 |
| Citation | 2021 NCSC 164 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. DAVID WARREN TAYLOR |
Heard in the Supreme Court on 24 March 2021.
Appeal pursuant to N.C. G.S. § 7A-31 from a unanimous decision of the Court of Appeals, 270 N.C.App. 514, vacating the judgment entered 23 January 2018 by Judge Gary M. Gavenus in Superior Court, Macon County.
Joshua H. Stein, Attorney General, by Nicholas S. Brod, Assistant Solicitor General, and Ryan Y. Park, Solicitor General, for the State-appellant.
Glenn Gerding, Appellate Defender, by Aaron Thomas Johnson Assistant Appellate Defender, for the defendant-appellee.
¶ 1 On 24 August 2016, defendant David Warren Taylor posted a string of angry comments on his personal Facebook social media page. The messages conveyed defendant's forceful disagreement with a decision by the area's elected District Attorney, Ashley Welch, not to criminally prosecute the parents of a child after the youngster's death under unusual circumstances in Macon County. During the diatribe defendant consumed an unspecified, but apparently significant, quantity of beer. Most of defendant's posts contained pointed inflammatory, but essentially political critiques of District Attorney Welch and various aspects of the Macon County judicial system.[1]
¶ 2 Some of the posts contained troubling language. In one of them, defendant promised that District Attorney Welch "will be the first to go" when a purportedly impending "rebellion against our government" occurs. In another comment, defendant declared that "[i]f [District Attorney Welch] won't do anything, then the death to her as well." Defendant also made numerous references to the firearms that he owned and his willingness to use them against law enforcement officers if he were ever "raided."
¶ 3 Within a couple of hours of publishing his final Facebook message, defendant reconsidered the wisdom of broadcasting his unadulterated opinions on social media, in what has been called "the modern public square." Packingham v. North Carolina, 137 S.Ct. 1730, 1737 (2017). However, before defendant could delete the rant from his Facebook page, one of his Facebook "friends"-a detective in the Macon County Sheriff's Office-became concerned that the messages harbored content more sinister than intemperate venting. The detective took screenshots of defendant's posted comments and sent them to District Attorney Welch and the Macon County Sheriff, who then contacted the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation (SBI). The next day, SBI investigators interviewed defendant at his office. That afternoon, defendant was arrested and later indicted under N.C. G.S. § 14-16.7(a) for "knowingly and willfully" threatening to kill a court officer. N.C. G.S. § 14-16.7(a) (2019). Defendant was subsequently convicted of the charged offense. He received a suspended sentence of 24 months of supervised probation and a $1, 000 fine. Defendant appealed, and the Court of Appeals concluded that his conviction violated the First Amendment. The State has appealed to this Court.
¶ 4 At its core, this case presents a single question: Does the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution[2] protect defendant from being convicted solely for publishing the messages contained in his Facebook posts? We conclude that it does, and therefore determine that his messages are shielded by the First Amendment. Accordingly, while the Court of Appeals was correct to vacate defendant's conviction, there remain questions for a properly instructed jury, so we reverse and remand the matter for a new trial.
¶ 5 Defendant and Welch were familiar with one another prior to the events which spawned this case. Defendant was a Macon County resident who supported Welch in her campaign for the elected office of District Attorney. Defendant worked in an office building which was close to the Macon County Courthouse where the two occasionally would see each other during work breaks. Defendant and Welch were friendly, even though their conversations often centered on "political" subjects.
¶ 6 Defendant's favorable view of District Attorney Welch changed on 24 August 2016 when he learned that she would not be pursuing criminal charges against the parents of a Macon County child who had died a few months earlier. Defendant's concerns were rooted in the tragic details of the child's death. According to the parents, the two-and-a-half-year-old boy had "some sniffles" when they tucked him in for a nap. When the parents returned, the youngster was not breathing. The parents claimed that they took their son directly to the hospital, but when they arrived at the emergency room, the child was already deceased and "incredibly decomposed." Welch was concerned that the child had been "killed or neglected," and consequently ordered an autopsy. To Welch's surprise, the parents' account was confirmed. The autopsy determined that the child's death and subsequent rapid physical decomposition did not result from any maltreatment or abuse. Lacking evidence of criminal conduct, Welch declined to press charges against the child's parents.
In response, a few of defendant's Facebook friends communicated their shared agreement with defendant's views. Defendant himself then resumed his commentary:
[Defendant]: Sick is not the word for it. This folks is how the government and the judicial system works, Now U wonder why I say if I am raided for whatever reason like the guy on smoke rise was. When the deputy ask me is it worth it. I would say with a Shotgun Pointed at him and a ar15 in the other arm was it worth to him? Who cares what happens to the person I meet at the door. I'm sure he won't. I would open every gun I have. I would rather be carried by six than judged by twelve. This folks is how politicians want u to believe is ok. Im tired of it. What I do Training wise from this point is ur fault. And yes I know I have friends on [Facebook] whom see this. I hope they do! Death to our so called judicial system since it only works for those that are guilty! U want me come and take me.
When one of his Facebook friends expressed surprise that these events could occur in Macon County, defendant responded, Another member of defendant's Facebook network called for "vigilante justice," which was punctuated by markedly numerous exclamation marks. Defendant replied:
If that what it takes[.] I will give them both the [mountain] justice they deserve. Regardless of what the law or courts say. I'm tired of this political bullshit. If our head prosecutor won't do anything then the death to her as well. Yea I said it. Now raid my house for communicating threats and see what they meet. After all those that flip Together swim together. Although this isn't a house or pond they want to fish in.
The author of the "vigilante justice" comment posted that he was "still waiting." Again, defendant responded:
For what [ ]? [District Attorney Welch] to reply? She won't because she is being paid a 6 digit income standing Outside the courthouse smoking a cigarette. She won't try a case unless it gets her TV time. Typical politician. Notice that none of them has responded yet? Although I'm sure My house is being Monitored right about now! I really hope They are ready for what meet them at the front door. Something tells Me they aren't!
As other Facebook observers continued to "like" his posts and comment on them, defendant published four more messages:
To continue reading
Request your trial