Any person convicted of a crime, whereby the rights of citizenship are forfeited, shall have such rights automatically restored upon the occurrence of any one of the following conditions:
(1) The unconditional discharge of an inmate, of a probationer, or of a parolee by the agency of the State having jurisdiction of that person or of a defendant under a suspended sentence by the court.
(2) The unconditional pardon of the offender.
(3) The satisfaction by the offender of all conditions of a conditional pardon.
(4) With regard to any person convicted of a crime against the United States, the unconditional discharge of such person by the agency of the United States having jurisdiction of such person, the unconditional pardon of such person or the satisfaction by such person of a conditional pardon.
(5) With regard to any person convicted of a crime in another state, the unconditional discharge of such person by the agency of that state having jurisdiction of such person, the unconditional pardon of such person or the satisfaction by such person of a conditional pardon. (1971, c. 902; 1973, c. 251; c. 1262, s. 10; 1977, c. 813, s. 1; 1991, c. 274, s. 1; 2011-145, s. 19.1(h); 2012-83, s. 18; 2013-410, s. 2.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
25
cases (
5 in the last 5 years), 1953–2024 · leading case:
State v. Haselden, 577 S.E.2d 594 (N.C. 2003).
State v. Haselden, 577 S.E.2d 594 (N.C. 2003).
· cites it 12× “Defendant contends that prospective juror Sexton did not need documentation restoring his citizenship rights because his rights were automatically restored under N.C.G.S. § 13-1(5). See N.C.G.S. § 13-1(5) (2001) (providing for automatic restoration of citizenship rights for a…”
State v. Grady, 831 S.E.2d 542 (N.C. 2019).
· cites it 6× “Contrary to the State’s argument, there is no precedent for the proposition that persons such as defendant, who have served their sentences and whose legal rights have been restored to them (with the exception of the right to possess firearms, see N.C.G.S. § 13-1 (2017)),…”
Britt v. State, 681 S.E.2d 320 (N.C. 2009).
· cites it 6× “6; N.C.G.S. §§ 13-1 to 13-4. (2007). The majority resists judicial restraint in an effort to fashion an individual exception for Mr.”
Cmty. Success Initiative v. Moore (N.C. 2023).
· cites it 516× “This case involves instead challenges to N.C.G.S. § 13-1, the statute that sets out the criteria that felons must satisfy to be eligible for re-enfranchisement.”
Skinner v. Preferred Credit, 638 S.E.2d 203 (N.C. 2006).
· cites it 3× “, Webster’s Real Estate *121 Law in North Carolina § 13-1, at 538 (Patrick K. Hetrick & James B.”
Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.S. 24 (1974).
· cites it 2× “Election Law § 152 (Supp. 1973-1974). Also in 1973, North Carolina amended its laws to restore all civil rights including the franchise to former felons discharged from prison or parole.”
State v. Currie, 202 S.E.2d 153 (N.C. 1974).
· cites it 7× “G.S. 13-1 to G.S. 13-5. (repealed in 1971).”
United States v. Henry David Thomas, 991 F.2d 206 (5th Cir. 1993).
“Neither did the Texas provisions in effect when Thomas was released from prison in 1959 contain such broad provisions.”
Cloer v. Smith, 512 S.E.2d 779 (N.C. Ct. App. 1999).
“Gray Wilson, North Carolina Civil Procedure § 13-1, at 256 (2d ed. 1995) (“On appeal from a magistrate for a trial de novo before a district judge, appropriate counterclaims and crossclaims may be asserted for the first time.”
New Covenant Worship Ctr. v. Wright, 601 S.E.2d 245 (N.C. Ct. App. 2004).
“As the document does not purport to pass title to Plaintiff, it cannot serve as color of title. Second, Plaintiff contends the 1985 deed of trust serves as valid color of title.”
State v. Currie, 198 S.E.2d 491 (N.C. Ct. App. 1973).
· cites it 3× “” At the time of defendant’s trial and conviction, G.S. 13-1 to 13-3 established a procedure by which the felon had to have appeared before a judge of the General Court of Justice, shown himself entitled under the statute, and taken an oath prescribed by the statute, before…”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 13-1(1) — 1 case
State v. Currie, 202 S.E.2d 153 (N.C. 1974).
“G.S. 13-1 to G.S. 13-5. (repealed in 1971).”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 13-1(5) — 1 case
State v. Haselden, 577 S.E.2d 594 (N.C. 2003).
“Defendant contends that prospective juror Sexton did not need documentation restoring his citizenship rights because his rights were automatically restored under N.C.G.S. § 13-1(5). See N.C.G.S. § 13-1(5) (2001) (providing for automatic restoration of citizenship rights for a…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.