If a teenage driver is involved in a car accident in NC, does the Juvenile Code's confidentiality rule prevent the police report from identifying the teen as the driver?

Plain-English summary

A Greensboro police attorney asked whether North Carolina’s juvenile-record confidentiality rule, G.S. 7A-675, prevented police from identifying a person under 18 in a motor vehicle collision report. The AG answered no. The opinion says collision reports under G.S. 20-166.1(e) had to be forwarded to the Division of Motor Vehicles and made available for public inspection and copying under subsection (i).

The distinction is the purpose of the record. The AG described a collision report as “a factual account of a motor vehicle collision.” It does not charge an offense or form the basis for a charge, and gathering information for it is not a criminal investigation. By contrast, the investigations and records protected by G.S. 7A-675 arise under the Juvenile Code and concern abuse, neglect, dependency, delinquency, or undisciplined behavior. The opinion concluded that the collision report’s different purpose and effect put it outside that provision, even when it named a person under 18.

The opinion does not decide whether a separate charge, investigation, or court record connected with the collision would be confidential. Its answer is limited to the collision report.

Currency note

This opinion applies the statutes as they stood in 1988. Check current collision-report and juvenile-record provisions for a present request. The opinion does not analyze later changes in juvenile jurisdiction or access rules.

Background and statutory framework

The AG relied on the rule that statutory language, purpose, and intended effect should be considered together. It described the records protected by G.S. 7A-675 as arising under the Juvenile Code and forming the basis for, or recording, services or proceedings involving juveniles. The collision report required by G.S. 20-166.1(e) served a different statutory function. That difference, rather than a general rule about every record mentioning a minor, was the basis for the answer.

Common questions

May the collision report identify a driver who is under 18?

Yes, under the provisions reviewed in this 1988 opinion. The AG expressly concluded that G.S. 7A-675 did not prohibit identifying a person under 18 who was involved in the collision.

Did the AG say a collision report charges the driver with an offense?

No. The opinion says the report is a factual account and “does not charge an offense, nor does it form the basis for a charge.”

What if a separate proceeding follows the crash?

The opinion does not address that proceeding or its records. It answers only whether G.S. 7A-675 shields identification in the collision report required by G.S. 20-166.1(e).

Source

• Landing page: https://ncdoj.gov/opinions/division-of-motor-vehicles-accident-reports-juvenile-code-confidentiality-of-juvenile-records/

Original opinion text

Requested By: Maurice A. Cawn, Police Attorney, City of Greensboro

Question: Do the confidentiality provisions of G.S. § 7A-675 prohibit the identification in a collision report filed pursuant to G.S. § 20-166.1(e) of a person under 18 years of age who was involved in the collision?

Conclusion: No.

Law enforcement officers are required by G.S. § 20-166.1(e) to investigate all motor vehicle collisions and to forward reports of the investigations to the Division of Motor Vehicles. There are no exceptions to this requirement. The reports are required to be made available for public inspection and copying by G.S. § 20-166.1(i). The question at issue is whether the provisions of G.S. § 7A-675, which provides for the confidentiality of investigations of juveniles and of juvenile records, apply to the reports required by G.S. § 20-166.1(e) when a driver involved in the collision is less than 18 years of age.

It is the opinion of this Office that the confidentiality provisions of G.S. § 7A-675 do not apply in such circumstances. An established rule of construction requires that the language of a statute, its spirit, and what it seeks to accomplish should all be considered in ascertaining the legislative intent. State ex rel. Utilities Commission v. Public Staff, 309 N.C. 195, 306 S.E.2d 435 (1983). The investigations and records protected by the confidentiality provisions of G.S. § 7A-675 are those arising under the Juvenile Code. They are investigations or records pertaining to abuse, neglect or dependency of juveniles or delinquent or undisciplined behavior by juveniles. They form the basis for or are accounts of services extended to such juveniles or of proceedings against and dispositions relating to such juveniles.

The report required by G.S. § 20-166.1(e), on the other hand, is a factual account of a motor vehicle collision. G.S. § 20-166.1(h). It does not charge an offense, nor does it form the basis for a charge. G.S. § 20-166.1(i). An investigation directed toward gathering information for the report is not a criminal investigation. We conclude, from the foregoing, that since collision investigations and reports differ so substantially in purpose and effect from juvenile investigations and reports, the collision reports do not fall within the purview of G.S. § 7A-675. The confidentiality provisions of that statute, therefore, do not prohibit the identification in a collision report of a person under 18 years of age who was involved in the collision.

Lacy H. Thornburg
Attorney General

Henry T. Rosser
Assistant Attorney General