In April 2021, Roxboro Police Officer SeanPatrick Leech responded to a report of an unknown boxcutter found in the bedroom of a rape victim. After confirming with the original investigating officer and his sergeant that the item was not involved in the crime, Leech disposed of it. When the District Attorney’s office later requested photos of the boxcutter, Leech reported his actions. An internal affairs investigation found an inconsistency between Leech’s and his sergeant’s statements.
On July 26, 2021, District Attorney Michael Waters informed Leech his office was investigating potential Giglio impeachment evidence. Waters sent Leech a Giglio letter on September 26, 2021, stating his office would no longer use Leech as a witness. The letter cited mishandling potential evidence and dishonesty, specifically that Leech’s claim about his sergeant’s approval was uncorroborated. The Roxboro Police Department then initiated termination proceedings. Leech resigned, believing an appeal would be futile as the Department could not challenge the Giglio letter.
In October 2021, North Carolina’s Giglio statute, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 17C-16, took effect. It requires anyone who receives a Giglio letter to provide a copy to the Criminal Justice Standards Division (CJSD) for entry into a database. The statute also directs the CJSD to republish the determination to a new agency if the officer seeks to transfer. The statute provides for a hearing only to confirm the letter’s issuance, not to review the merits of its allegations.
In 2023, after an independent investigation by the Department of Justice found no probable cause for the accusations, Leech requested Waters withdraw the letter. Waters refused. Leech then filed a lawsuit against Waters for constitutional violations and against the State for facial and as-applied challenges to the Giglio statute.
The State and Waters filed motions to dismiss. After a hearing, the trial court requested supplemental briefing on seven questions. In his supplemental brief, Waters attached an affidavit and two letters as evidence. Leech filed an objection and motion to strike the materials, arguing the trail court’s consideration of evidence outside the pleadings converted the motion to one for summary judgment, requiring him to be given a chance to respond. The trial court granted the motions to dismiss without ruling on Leech’s motion to strike and cited the supplemental materials in its order.
The North Carolina Court of Appeals vacated the order and remanded the case. The Court held that the trial court’s consideration of the affidavit and letters, which were outside the pleadings and not the subject of the complaint, converted the motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment. When such a conversion occurs, the parties must be given a reasonable opportunity to present all pertinent material. The trial court erred by not ruling on Leech’s motion to strike and by not allowing him time to rebut the new evidence. The Court remanded Leech’s claims against Waters and his as-applied challenge to the statute for further proceedings under the summary judgment standard.
The Court also found Leech sufficiently raised a facial constitutional challenge to the statute, alleging it denies law enforcement officers due process before being listed in the CJSD database.
Finally, the Court noted that recent North Carolina Supreme Court decisions have clarified the standard of review for constitutional claims under the state’s “fruits of their own labor” clause. This new precedent, which requires a fact-intensive inquiry into the government’s purpose and the reasonableness of its chosen means, may impact the trial court’s reconsideration of the claims on remand.
Leech v. State, 922 S.E.2d 732 (N.C. Ct. App. 2025).