Lack Of Criminal Intent

Summary

The prosecution must prove Mr. Edwards acted with intent to defraud, which is absent as his actions aimed to ensure water access for his family. The necessity defense highlights emergency circumstances, and procedural failures by the water department, including lack of notice, weaken the case. Constitutional violations, such as due process breaches, and potential retaliatory motives further support dismissal. The charges may be unfounded due to lack of criminal intent and procedural irregularities.

Full Conversation

Continue
Sure, here is a concise rewrite of the motion:
---
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
GATES COUNTY DISTRICT COURT DIVISION
Plaintiff
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
v.
CHARLES BRIAN EDWARDS, Defendant
FILE NO. 24CR349964-*
MOTION TO DISMISS
COMES NOW the Defendant, Charles Brian Edwards, by and through undersigned counsel, and respectfully moves this Honorable Court to dismiss the charges against him pursuant to Rule *(b) of the North Carolina Rules of Criminal Procedure. In support, the Defendant states as follows:
I. INTRODUCTION
Defendant is charged with Misdemeanor Reconnect Utility (NCGS § *-*(d)(*)) and Felony Reconnect Utility (NCGS § *-*(d)(*)) for allegedly reconnecting water service to his property on June *, *, and June *, *. These charges are unfounded and retaliatory, rooted in procedural irregularities and constitutional violations.
**II. GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL
A. Procedural Violations
- Lack of Probable Cause Affidavit: The arrest warrant lacks a supporting affidavit of probable cause, undermining its validity.
- Improper Service and Notice: The water department failed to provide required disconnection notices, violating its Customer Service Policy and due process.
B. Substantive Grounds
- Lack of Criminal Intent: No evidence suggests the Defendant acted with intent to defraud or harm the water department. Actions were driven by necessity due to extreme heat conditions.
- Necessity Defense: The limited water usage was for essential hygiene and animal welfare. Service was voluntarily disconnected after emergency needs were met.
C. Legal Defects
- Unlawful Disconnection by Water Department: The department lacked regulatory oversight, standardized disconnection protocols, and recorded utility easements, making its disconnection procedures and resulting charges legally defective.
- Retaliatory Prosecution: Charges were filed promptly after the Defendant’s wife filed a misconduct complaint against local law enforcement, suggesting retaliatory intent.
D. Constitutional Violations
- Due Process Violations: Proper notice or opportunity to address account discrepancies was not provided. Removal of the meter and pipes