# In re: The Richmond Cnty. Jail Facilities

> Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 20, 2026

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11329076

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals of North Carolina
- **Decided:** May 20, 2026
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion by Judge Fred Gore
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11329076

## Opinion text

An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute
controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with
the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA

No. COA25-19

Filed 20 May 2026

Richmond County, No. 24CVS000748-760

IN THE MATTER OF

THE RICHMOND COUNTY JAIL FACILITIES

Appeal by respondents from order entered 11 September 2024 by Judge

Stephan R. Futrell in Richmond County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of

Appeals 12 August 2025.

McGuirewoods LLP, by Henry L. Kitchin, Jr., Jonathan Y. Ellis, and Armina
A. Manning, and Van Camp, Meacham & Newman, PLLC, by Michael J.
Newman, for respondents-appellants.

N.C. Prisoner Legal Services, Inc., by Elizabeth Hopkins Thomas, Lee Matthew
Pollack, and Cheryl A. Sullivan, for the Superior Court of Richmond County.

GORE, Judge.

Respondents Richmond County, Jeff Smart, Justin Dawkins, Rick Watkins,

Andy Grooms, Toni Maples, Jason Gainey, Robin Roberts, and Bryan Land, seek

interlocutory appeal of an order appointing the Honorable G. Bryan Collins, Resident

Superior Court Judge, to preside over the matter. Upon review of the motion to

dismiss, the petition for writ of certiorari or writ of prohibition, and the record, we
IN RE: THE RICHMOND CNTY. JAIL FACILITIES

Opinion of the Court

deny the motion to dismiss the interlocutory appeal, we deny the petitions as moot,

and we vacate and remand.

Respondents seek appeal of the order entered 11 September 2024 in which the

Honorable Stephan R. Futrell, the Senior Resident Superior Court Judge of

Richmond County, Judicial District 21, assigned the present case involving the

Richmond County Jail Facilities to the Honorable G. Bryan Collins, Resident

Superior Court Judge of the 10th Judicial District, to preside over all matters

involved in the case. Within the order, Judge Futrell found that Judge Collins was

assigned for six months to hear matters in the 21st Judicial District pursuant to the

Chief Justice’s 2025 Master Calendar.

Briefly, this case arises from the sua sponte and ex parte order entered by

Judge Futrell initiating the Richmond County Grand Jury’s inspection of the

Richmond County Jail pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 15A-628(a)(5). The trial court cited its

inherent authority pursuant to In re Alamance Cnty. Ct. Facilities, 329 N.C. 84

(1991), and Ragan v. Cnty. of Alamance, 330 N.C. 110 (1991), to require adequate

facilities from the county commissioners. The grand jury inspected the jail and

submitted its findings to the court.

The trial court also appointed counsel from the North Carolina Prison Legal

Services to represent the court, investigate, and present evidence of the Richmond

County Jail’s facilities. The trial court stated it would conduct hearings “to determine

whether the Richmond County Commissioners and County Manager have acted

-2-
IN RE: THE RICHMOND CNTY. JAIL FACILITIES

Opinion of the Court

capriciously or arbitrarily, in bad faith or in disregard of the law, and whether th[e]

[c]ourt should compel action in good faith in accord with the law, in connection with

the provision of adequate local confinement facilities.” The trial court instructed

service of the Order and attachments upon the county commissioners, the county

manager, and Richmond County.

Upon service of the Order and attachments, counsel for respondents entered a

notice of appearance. On 11 September 2024, Judge Futrell entered another order

stating, “the appointment of an appropriate superior court judge to preside over all

proceedings [was] reasonably necessary for proper administration of justice.”

Accordingly, Judge Futrell appointed and assigned the case to Judge Collins, after

stating Judge Collins was assigned to the 21st Judicial District in the 2025 Master

Calendar.

On 19 September 2024, respondents moved to designate as exceptional case

pursuant to Rule 2.1(a) of the General Rules of Practice for the Superior and District

Courts and simultaneously moved to disqualify and recuse Judge Futrell. On 25

September 2024, respondents noticed appeal of the 11 September 2024 Order.

Respondents seek interlocutory appeal arguing it affects a substantial right or

alternatively, they petition for writ of certiorari or writ of prohibition. Respondents

state the issue is “whether a trial court possesses inherent authority to permanently

and sua sponte appoint a judge from anywhere in the State to preside over any and

all proceedings in a matter before it.” As all parties recognize, there is generally no

-3-
IN RE: THE RICHMOND CNTY. JAIL FACILITIES

Opinion of the Court

right of immediate appeal from interlocutory orders apart from a Rule 54(b)

certification, or when the order affects a substantial right that will be lost if not

immediately reviewed. Turner v. Norfolk S. Corp., 137 N.C. App. 138, 141 (2000).

Respondents argue the appeal implicates a substantial right. Specifically, they

argue Judge Collins lacks authority to preside over this matter, and secondly, waiting

to decide this case “would foreclose all meaningful judicial review of the question.”

They also state that this matter could take several years before a final order is

entered, and by then “Richmond County will have endured the full effect of the

injuries caused by being forced to litigate a proceeding presided over by a judicial

officer who lacks legal authority to preside over the matter.”

The trial court found that Judge Collins was assigned to the 21st Judicial

District in 2025. See generally, Vance Constr. Co. v. Duane White Land Corp., 127

N.C. App. 493, 495 (1997) (cleaned up) (“We take judicial notice of the fact that the

Chief Justice by order assigns resident or regular judges of the superior courts to

various counties or judicial districts as they appear on the master calendar.”). But

see id. (“Because Judge Brown had no commission from the Chief Justice or other

authorization to hold a session of superior court in Warren County or District 9 during

the week plaintiff’s motion was heard, the order entered is void.”). Because there are

explicit statutory directives for assigning superior court judges to other districts, we

determine this case affects a substantial right and grant interlocutory appeal.

Respondents argue only the Chief Justice has statutory authority to assign a

-4-
IN RE: THE RICHMOND CNTY. JAIL FACILITIES

Opinion of the Court

superior court judge to reside in a particular court and hear the entirety of a

particular case. We agree.

The North Carolina Constitution granted authority to the Chief Justice to

assign superior court judges to various districts. N.C. Const. art. IV, § 11; see

N.C.G.S. § 7A-47.3 (2024). The authority and jurisdiction of superior court judges is

limited to the assigned district or place the judge ordinarily resides. Vance Const.

Co., 127 N.C. App. at 495. A superior court judge has limited authority to refer a

motion to another resident superior court judge who regularly holds court in the

district or set of districts, and the designated judge has authority for that motion, but

we are unaware of any statutory authority for a superior court judge to designate a

judge to specially preside over the entirety of a case. N.C.G.S. § 7A-49.1 (2024). When

a case is considered “exceptional,” the Chief Justice may assign a specific superior

court judge to hear the entire case. N.C. Super. Ct. Dist. Ct. R. 2.1. While the

superior court judges may recommend a case be designated exceptional to the Chief

Justice, it is the Chief Justice who holds the authority to ultimately make the

assignment over a specific case. Id.

In the present case, Judge Futrell’s order exercised authority beyond his

jurisdiction. See State v. Brice, 370 N.C. 244, 251 (2017) (cleaned up) (“Where

jurisdiction is statutory and the Legislature requires the Court to exercise its

jurisdiction in a certain manner, to follow a certain procedure, or otherwise subjects

the Court to certain limitations, an act of the Court beyond these limits is in excess

-5-
IN RE: THE RICHMOND CNTY. JAIL FACILITIES

Opinion of the Court

of its jurisdiction.”). Although Judge Collins was assigned to the Richmond County

district for a portion of 2025, the order was entered in 2024 and assigned Judge

Collins to preside over the entirety of the case. Because this contravenes the explicit

statutory mandate for who may assign superior court judges to a district and

contravenes Rule 2.1 by which the superior courts are bound, we must vacate and

remand.

Upon remand, Judge Futrell may proceed under Rule 2.1 and request the Chief

Justice designate the present case as exceptional. Judge Futrell may provide

recommendations of judges along with reasons for such recommendations pursuant

to Rule 2.1. But it is only within the Chief Justice’s authority to assign a certain

superior court judge to preside over the entirety of the case.

For the foregoing reasons, we deny the motion to dismiss the interlocutory

appeal, and upon review we vacate and remand. We deny the petitions for writ of

certiorari and writ of prohibition as moot.

VACATE AND REMAND.

Judges GRIFFIN and STADING concur.

Report per Rule 30(e).

-6-

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11329076. Public record. Not legal advice.
