Decision expected within two weeks, judge says
Robbinsville – A precedent-setting hearing regarding the permanent removal of suspended Graham County Sheriff Brad Hoxit wrapped up Friday afternoon – though a decision could take up to two weeks to be rendered.
After hearing closing arguments, District 38 Special Superior Court Judge William T. Stetzer – who presided over State of North Carolina v. Harold Bradford Hoxit, at the request of District 43A Superior Court Judge Tessa Sellers – said he recognized the need for closure in the matter, but also had three full legal pads of notes to mull over.
“The statute requires these type of hearings occur rapidly, but that doesn’t mean I’m in a position to issue an order today,” Stetzer said. “I think it may appear at times that the court system is not very efficient – and I would agree: the court system is not designed to be efficient. It is designed to get things right, instead.”
Stetzer also reiterated his order that Hoxit remain off the premises of the Graham County Sheriff’s Office, which was issued after he was observed spending time inside the facility off Rodney Orr Bypass following his Jan. 29 suspension, which began after District Attorney Ashley Welch filed a 53-page petition for removal and motion to immediately suspend him from the role. The petition alleges that Hoxit engaged in misconduct, maladministration, extortion and corruption while in office.
The Graham County Board of Commissioners appointed Russell Moody to serve as temporary sheriff Feb. 23. Moody was Graham County Sheriff from 2006-09 and lost to Hoxit while running for the office again in the 2022 general election.
The state’s case revolves around an investigation Hoxit had the Graham County Sheriff’s Office launch against Graham County Commissioner Jacob Nelms last year, regarding alleged violations of Nelms’ duties in his role as the county’s building inspector. Hoxit is now married to Nelms’ ex-wife.
Other testimonies
Four witnesses fully testified during the first day of the hearing March 24, with a total of 34 issued subpoenas by both the prosecution and the defense.
Anticipating a lengthy ending Friday, Stetzer said March 26 that Friday’s session would last until all witnesses had be called. Instead, roughly 1/3 of those summoned to the Graham County Courthouse ultimately took the witness stand throughout the entirety of the hearing:
* March 24: Beth Landreth (Transylvania County Register of Deeds); Tammy Holloway (Graham County Clerk of Court); Leonard Stump (North Carolina Department of Insurance Criminal Investigation Western Commander); Jasmine Hanline (N.C. Department of Insurance Special Investigator); and Dani Burrows (District Attorney’s Office Special Investigator).
* March 25: Burrows’ testimony concluded; David Wijewickrama (former Graham County Sheriff’s Office Attorney); Cody George (former Graham County Sheriff’s Office Chief Deputy); Vanessa Carpenter (former Graham County Detention Officer); and Graham Page (former Graham County Sheriff’s Office Investigator).
* March 26: Page’s testimony concluded; Jerry Crisp (former Graham County Sheriff); Hoxit.
* March 27: Hoxit testified throughout the final day of the hearing.
Hoxit on the stand
Hoxit’s lengthy testimony refuted several key components of what either had been introduced as evidence by the state, or testified upon in court by other individuals during the hearing.
Of note:
* After a recording of a meeting Hoxit had with a Graham County inmate was played in private – with only counsel present – Hoxit said he not only never threatened to blacklist Carpenter’s law-enforcement career, but also did not threaten the inmate with a Taser. Both allegations had been made by Carpenter during a signed affidavit;
* Hoxit said the only reason Carpenter established a fake email address and started requesting public records from Graham County officials was due to being upset about asbestos exposure inside the detention center. Hoxit testified that he simply provided Carpenter with guidance on how to best pursue the requests;
* Hoxit admitted to refusing to take George home during a ride in Hoxit’s personal vehicle last fall, but said the purpose of the ride was to “clear up any issues” the two had. Hoxit said he was “surprised” that George resigned the following day, as he “thought the situation was better” once Hoxit dropped George back off at his home;
* The details of the investigation into alleged misappropriation of time sheets and improper building permits being issued by Nelms were never discussed by Hoxit with Nelms’ ex-wife, per Hoxit’s testimony.
Welch later had the opportunity to cross-examine Hoxit, which led to a roller coaster of emotions filling the courtroom. At times cordial – and at others, contentious – information revealed included:
* Hoxit admitted that he could not remember much of the oath he was sworn to when he took office in 2022, nor the one he agreed to when becoming a member of the N.C. State Highway Patrol in 1996. He did offer a brief summary: “Be truthful and enforce laws, and not be truthful;”
* Hoxit said he only believed in providing security for the courtroom when court was in session, but not for the entire courthouse itself;
* Hoxit said he and his former fiancee began a business venture with Nelms and his ex-wife, called “28 Hospitality,” which provided food services at Fontana Village Resort.
Hoxit admitted that he “didn’t help out much,” but said his former partner and Nelms’ former wife were the “workhorses.”
* The atmosphere shifted when Welch asked Hoxit about becoming a certified polygraph examiner, which Hoxit said occurred in the early 2000s. When Welch seemed to mix up her terminology and call an interview after a polygraph an “after test,” Hoxit was quick to correct her with the term, “post term.” At first, Welch thanked him and Hoxit smiled. Welch pointed out that the two had known each other for a long time, before asking Hoxit if he had winked at her. Hoxit denied doing so intentionally, with Welch adding the same thing had allegedly happened when Burrows was on the stand.
* Hoxit testified that he placed “some” of the sticky notes Welch found inside the three-ring binders that contained printouts of Nelms’ cell phone and GPS data records. Hoxit said he was “familiar” with the binders, but not “infatuated” with them. Welch later alleged that Hoxit’s markers in the binders might have lined up with a timeline of Hoxit and Nelms’ former wife splitting up, with Welch alleging the later would go back to Nelms in-between;
* Hoxit said he “did not recall” Welch requesting the binders at the Feb. 20 pre-trial hearing, but added that he had them in his vehicle because he had met with the N.C. State Bureau of Investigation about the Nelms case and had not taken them back out.
During cross-examination, Welch asked Hoxit about a subpoena being issued to Page’s ex-wife after the witness list was submitted to Stetzer at 2 p.m., March 24. Hoxit admitted to knowing about the subpoena, with Welch noting that Page left the morning session of March 26’s hearing – while on the stand – only to find his ex-wife in the lobby of the courthouse, after receiving a subpoena the night before.
Welch heavily implied that the defense had the subpoena delivered to upset Page during his testimony.
Closing arguments
“The smaller the community, the more powerful the sheriff is.”
Welch began her closing argument Friday by contrasting the presence the Graham County Sheriff has versus the Mecklenburg County Sheriff, noting that the latter might only have to serve subpoenas and oversee an office.
She then summarized the reasons for the hearing and called Hoxit both “manipulative” and “cruel.” “The most corrupt man in the middle of all of this is sitting right over there,” Welch said, pointing to her left at Hoxit. “He doesn’t understand why it’s wrong, because he’s the sheriff.”
Welch said she recognized Hoxit’s approach when the two met – at his request – Jan. 6. She immediately picked up on interrogation techniques that he had learned throughout his career, which she alleges Hoxit used to control those around him.
She wrapped up by praising law enforcement – saying that “almost all” police officers are “great” – and then asked Stetzer to set the correct standard.
“A petition for removal never goes to trial,” said Welch. “(This can) send a message that this kind of behavior will not be tolerated.”
Stephen Lindsey with Asheville-based Lindsey Law – the firm representing Hoxit in the case – began his closing argument by pointing out that Hoxit did not ask Nelms to break the law.
“As a former friend, this caused a conflict,” Lindsay noted.
Lindsay added that Hoxit had “no motive” to pursue the case.
The attorney touched on Page’s testimony, painting Hoxit’s former investigator as someone bitter about being passed over for a promotion and who had an “axe to grind.” He also said that Carpenter “stretched the truth” while under oath, in order to “get even” with Hoxit over his personal life.
Follow The Graham Star on either Facebook or X for an update on the outcome of the hearing, which will be posted as soon as it becomes available.