Can a North Carolina probation or parole officer, including an intensive probation officer, lawfully carry a concealed weapon while on duty?

Plain-English summary

The opinion addresses whether intensive probation officers and probation/parole officers more broadly come within North Carolina's concealed-weapons exemption for officers of the State charged with executing the law.

The AG answered yes. The statute that grants probation officers their arrest power, G.S. 15-205, says: "A probation officer shall have, in the execution of his duties, the powers of arrest and, to the extent necessary for the performance of his duties, the same right to execute process as is now given, or that may hereafter be given by law, to the sheriffs of this State."

That arrest power matters under G.S. 14-269. The carrying-concealed-weapons statute prohibits the practice in general but exempts officers of the State charged with the execution of the laws of this State, when acting in the discharge of their official duties.

The Court of Appeals had already worked with this framework in State v. Waller, 37 N.C. App. 133 (1978). Waller was convicted of assault on a probation/parole officer (William R. Bonar) and a police officer (G. W. Williams) while they were discharging their duties. The Court of Appeals treated the probation/parole officer as acting in his official capacity within the meaning of the relevant statute. The 1984 AG opinion treats Waller as confirming that probation/parole officers function as law enforcement officers for these statutory purposes.

The conclusion: probation/parole officers come within the G.S. 14-269 exemption and may lawfully carry concealed weapons while discharging their official duties.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1984. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here. North Carolina's concealed carry framework has changed substantially. The state introduced a concealed handgun permit framework in 1995 and has revised both the permit framework and the law enforcement officer exemptions multiple times since. The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA, 2004) adds a federal layer for off-duty and retired officers. Modern probation and parole officer concealed-carry practice is governed by current G.S. 14-269 text, Department of Correction (or Department of Public Safety) policy, LEOSA where applicable, and any specific training and certification requirements.

Historical context: what the AG concluded

The opinion does the following:

It grounds the analysis in arrest power. Under G.S. 14-269, the concealed-carry exemption applies to officers of the State charged with executing the laws. The structural question is whether probation/parole officers are such officers. G.S. 15-205 answers the question by giving them arrest power. With arrest power comes officer status for the relevant statutory purpose.

It treats sheriff-equivalent process-service authority as confirming officer status. G.S. 15-205 gives probation officers the same right as sheriffs to execute process within the bounds of their duties. That is a strong indicator of officer-of-the-State status.

It applies the Court of Appeals holding in State v. Waller. Waller involved an assault on a probation/parole officer (charged under the assault-on-officer statute). The Court treated the officer as functioning as an officer of the State. The 1984 AG carries that conclusion across to the concealed-carry context.

It limits the exemption to discharge of duties. The opinion frames the answer in terms of "acting in the discharge of their official duties." Off-duty carry is a separate question (now substantially affected by LEOSA at the federal level, but in 1984 a state-law-only question). The 1984 opinion does not address off-duty carry.

Background and statutory framework

North Carolina's adult probation and parole system has long given officers the practical authority of law enforcement. Probation/parole officers in 1984 worked under the Department of Correction (now the Department of Adult Correction within the Department of Public Safety). They supervised offenders on probation or parole, made home visits, monitored compliance, and arrested offenders for technical or new-crime violations.

Their work routinely brought them into contact with offenders in offender homes, in neighborhoods with significant violent crime, and in field settings without quick access to backup. The need for sidearm protection was practical, not theoretical.

The intensive probation program was a 1980s innovation that placed certain offenders under more rigorous supervision than ordinary probation. Intensive probation officers visited offenders more frequently, sometimes at unpredictable hours, and worked with offenders who posed higher risk profiles. The 1984 opinion addresses both intensive and ordinary probation/parole officers, confirming the same legal answer for all.

G.S. 14-269 is North Carolina's general carrying-concealed-weapons statute. In 1984, the statute prohibited concealed carry without a specific exemption. Officers of the State executing the laws were one of the enumerated exemptions, alongside several others. The statute has been substantially revised in subsequent decades, including the 1995 introduction of the concealed handgun permit framework.

State v. Waller (1978) is a Court of Appeals decision that confirmed the officer status of probation/parole officers for purposes of the assault-on-officer statute. The opinion uses Waller as an authority bridge: if the officer is an officer of the State for one purpose, the same status applies for the related concealed-carry exemption.

Common questions

Does the exemption cover off-duty carry?

The 1984 opinion frames the answer in terms of "discharging their official duties." Off-duty carry is a separate question. In 1984, that would have been governed by general G.S. 14-269 prohibition and any specific exemptions; today, LEOSA provides federal protection for off-duty qualified law enforcement officers, and North Carolina has its own concealed handgun permit framework. Modern probation/parole officers usually rely on a combination of LEOSA and a concealed handgun permit.

What about probation officers in training, or unsworn support staff?

The opinion's reasoning rests on G.S. 15-205 arrest power. Personnel without sworn arrest authority would not fit within the same exemption. Specific positions should be checked against the current statutory and Department framework.

What kind of weapon does this allow?

The 1984 opinion answers a categorical question about whether the exemption applies, not what type of weapon is permitted. Sidearm carry as part of approved equipment is what the opinion contemplates. Department of Correction policy on approved firearms, training, and qualification supplies the practical limits.

Can a probation officer's supervisor restrict the carry?

Yes. Department policy generally governs how the statutory authority is exercised in practice. The statutory exemption gives legal permission; agency policy gives the operational framework. Officers carrying outside agency policy would face administrative consequences even though the statutory exemption protects them from criminal liability.

What if the officer makes a mistake about whether he is in the discharge of duties?

The exemption applies when the officer is acting in the discharge of duties. A mistaken belief that activity is part of official duties, when in fact it is personal time, would not bring the activity within the exemption. The line is fact-specific.

Source

• Landing page: https://ncdoj.gov/opinions/weapons-carrying-concealed-weapons-intensive-probation-officers/

Citations

• N.C.G.S. § 14-269
• N.C.G.S. § 15-205
• State v. Waller, 37 N.C. App. 133 (1978)

Original opinion text

Subject:

Requested by:

Conclusion:

. . . A probation officer shall have, in the execution of his duties, the powers of arrest and, to the extent necessary for the performance of his duties, the same right to execute process as is now given, or that may hereafter be given by law, to the sheriffs of this State.

The applicability of G.S. 15-205 was considered by the North Carolina Court of Appeals in State v. Waller, 37 N.C. App. 133 (1978). Waller was convicted of assaulting William R. Bonar, a probation/parole officer, and G. W. Williams, a police officer, while they were discharging or attempting to discharge the duties of their offices. The Court stated that:

[. . .]

Since probation/parole officers possess the power to arrest, they would come within the exemption of G.S. 14-269 which permits officers of the State charged with the executions of the law of this State, when acting in the discharge of their official duties, to carry concealed weapons.

RUFUS L. EDMISTEN
ATTORNEY GENERAL

Jacob L. Safron
Special Deputy Attorney General