When a client escapes from a NC state psychiatric hospital like Broughton, how widely do staff have to notify law enforcement, and does it matter whether the client has a history of violence?

Plain-English summary

Broughton Hospital's director asked how far a facility's notice to law enforcement should extend after a client escaped, and whether a history of violence changed that scope. The AG said the test was whether there were reasonable grounds to believe the client might be found in a particular place. The facility should notify law enforcement in any such locale, within or outside North Carolina, as the circumstances require.

G.S. § 122C-205(c), as quoted in the opinion, called for initial notification by telephone to the appropriate agency or agencies. It also provided for a Division of Criminal Information message to agencies in or out of State and an entry into the National Crime Information Center system if available and appropriate. The AG illustrated wider notice with a client whose personal ties gave the facility reason to believe the client might go to another state.

The AG said the client's propensity for violence did not create a separate rule widening notification. Location remained the determining factor. Possible violence was relevant information to provide to the law-enforcement agencies receiving notice. The opinion did not prescribe DCI or NCIC use based on a risk label.

Currency note

This opinion interprets the notification statute as discussed in 1993. Check the current provision and agency procedures for a present escape response.

Background and statutory framework

The quoted G.S. § 122C-205(a) referred to agencies in the client's home county, the facility's county, and any county where there were reasonable grounds to believe the client could be found. The AG treated the last category as a reasonableness standard that could extend beyond the State. Subsection (c) specified telephone as the initial channel and made electronic messages and NCIC entry conditional on availability and appropriateness.

The opinion separates where notice should go from what relevant information should accompany it. A client's violent propensity informs the message, but does not by itself expand the geographical scope.

Common questions

How does a facility decide which agencies to notify?

It should consider where it has reasonable grounds to believe the client may be found and notify law enforcement in those locations. The opinion gives a possible out-of-state destination based on personal ties as an example.

Are DCI and NCIC required for every escape?

The statutory passage quoted in the opinion calls for initial telephone notice and electronic DCI and NCIC steps “if available and appropriate.” The AG did not make a blanket rule for every case or link those steps to a client's risk level.

Does a violent history widen the notification area?

No separate expansion follows from violence under the opinion. The agency's location-based reasonable-grounds test remains the same, while possible violence should be shared with the agencies notified.

Citations

• N.C.G.S. § 122C-205 (notification by 24-hour facilities of client escape or breach of conditional release)
• N.C.G.S. § 122C-205(a) (notification to appropriate law-enforcement agency in client's county of residence, county where facility located, and any county where reasonable grounds to believe client may be found)
• N.C.G.S. § 122C-205(c) (initial notification by telephone; if available and appropriate, by DCI message to any in-state or out-of-state agency and by entry into NCIC)

Source

• Landing page: https://ncdoj.gov/opinions/scope-of-a-facilitys-notification-to-law-enforcement-agencies-that-a-client-has-escaped/

Original opinion text

June 9, 1993

M.F. Hall, Jr., Director Broughton Hospital 1000 South Sterling Street Morganton, North Carolina 28655

RE: G.S. § 122C-205

Dear Mr. Hall:

You have asked the Office of the Attorney General to respond to the following questions dealing with G.S. § 122C-205: (1) what should be the scope of a facility's notification to law enforcement agencies that a client has escaped? and (2) what impact, if any, should the client's propensity for violence have on the scope of the notification? A copy of your request is attached for your convenient reference.

With respect to how extensive the notification must be, G.S. § 122C-205(a) provides that notification may be given to the appropriate law enforcement agency in the county of residence of the client, in the county where the facility is located, and in any county where there "are reasonable grounds to believe that the client may be found." The test is one of reasonableness, and the facility must notify law enforcement agencies in any locale when there is reason to believe the client may there be found. G.S. § 122C-205(c) offers further guidance and provides, in pertinent part:

. . . the initial notification by the 24-hour facility of the client's escape or breach of conditional release shall be given by telephone communication to the appropriate law enforcement agency or agencies and, if available and appropriate, by Division of Criminal Information (DCI) message to any law enforcement agency in or out of state and by entry into the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) telecommunications system.

The foregoing provision suggests that the notification should be as extensive as the circumstances require. For example, if a client escapes from Broughton Hospital and the facility has reasonable grounds to believe that the client may go to another state because of personal ties there, it would be appropriate for the facility to provide notification to law enforcement officials in that state in addition to notifying the officials in the client's home county and in Burke County. Again, the test is whether the facility has reasonable grounds to believe that the client may be found in a particular location within or without the state.

With respect to whether the scope of notification may be expanded where the client has been accused of or convicted of a violent crime, the statute does not so provide. The determining factor is whether there are reasonable grounds to believe a client may be found in a given location, regardless of his propensity for violence. However, the fact that the person may be violent is relevant information and should be provided to the relevant law enforcement agency or agencies along with notification of the escape. See G.S. § 122C-205(a) and (c).

Ann Reed Senior Deputy Attorney General

Michelle B. McPherson Special Deputy Attorney General