Legal Question in Criminal Law in North Carolina

That is a very good question. The State would have to prove the violation and prove that the Defendant is the "owner" of the dog. It is very difficult to prove ownership unless the owner "confesses." Once the person is charged, the person has a fifth amendment right to remain silent, and the State would have a very difficult time proving ownership. In addition the State must introduce the actual local ordnance into evidence during the trial since the Court cannot take Judicial Notice of local ordinances.

The local ordnance should have language something like this:

The board of commissioners of a county may adopt an ordinance to apply only in a special district created under this act, which requires that no owner or keeper of any dog shall permit such dog to run at large. For the purpose of that ordinance, the following definitions apply:

(1) "Owner or keeper"means any person or persons, or firm, association or corporation, owning, keeping, or harboring a dog;

(2) "At large"is intended to mean off the premises of the owner or keeper and not under restraint;

(3) "Under restraint"means:

a. Controlled by means of a chain, leash or other like device;

b. On or within a vehicle being driven or parked; or

c. Within a secure enclosure which prevents the dog from injuring

persons; and

(4) "Premises"means land and buildings.

A good defense could very easily win the case. It is very common for the prosecutor to fail to properly introduce the local ordinance into evidence.