Robbinsville – Tuesday marked the beginning of what is estimated to be a four-day hearing regarding the permanent removal of suspended Graham County Sheriff Brad Hoxit from office.
Hoxit has been suspended from his duties since District Attorney Ashley Welch filed a 53-page petition for removal and motion to immediately suspend Hoxit from the role Jan. 29, which 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.
State of North Carolina v. Harold Bradford Hoxit 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.
Prior to opening statements Tuesday, it was noted that the state (prosecution) intends to call 18 witnesses to testify in the matter, while the defense will ask for 16. Stephen Lindsey with Asheville-based Lindsey Law – the firm representing Hoxit in the case – also cited an unusual occurrence Monday, in which officers from Haywood County made an unscheduled visit to Hoxit at his residence, in order to return personal items belonging to Hoxit. Welch seemed caught off-guard by the development.
All witnesses were asked to leave the courtroom before testimonies began, with five exceptions made: Welch, Special Investigator for the District Attorney's Office Dani Burrows, Graham County Attorney Jay Coward, Superior Court Judge for the 29th Judicial District Tommy Davis and Graham County Clerk of Court Tammy Holloway.
Opening remarks
Neither the prosecution nor the defense revealed any new details while delivering their opening statements before District 38 Special Superior Court Judge William T. Stetzer.
Stetzer is from Gaston County, but is presiding over the case at the request of District 43A Superior Court Judge Tessa Sellers.
Welch repeated her belief that Hoxit had practiced maladministration while in office.
"The evidence is going to show the court how he abused the power of his office in ways that no other person would be allowed to obtain information that otherwise, he would have no access to," Welch said. "He's going to cloak it in the argument that he was investigating a crime."
The case's allegation that Hoxit extorted officers under his employment was a "pattern," according to Welch.
"You're going to hear how he used the power to obtain information and to extort individuals in his department," said Welch. "Threaten them, with their jobs. With their careers. With their reputations. You're going to notice that's a pattern."
Lindsay said that his client was simply doing his job, noting that Hoxit had even requested an investigation by the North Carolina Department of Insurance regarding Nelms. He also contended that Nelms was not being investigated because of Hoxit's relationship with Nelms' former spouse.
"The evidence in this case is going to show that citizens of Graham County were contacting the sheriff's office and advising that county commissioner Nelms – who also serves as an inspector of property in Graham County – wasn't doing his job," Lindsay said. "What you're going to find is that when this information was brought to Sheriff Hoxit's attention, it presented an unusual, a unique and a difficult set of circumstances, because the person that was being reported to the sheriff's office was Sheriff Hoxit's wife's ex-husband. His duty was to entrust the investigation to others in his office – which he did, but to monitor what was going on.
"In the end, Jacob Nelms was being investigated because of Jacob Nelms. Sheriff Hoxit did the best that he could – under challenging circumstances – but he didn't break the law."
Testimonies
Four witnesses completed their testimonies and were released from their subpoenas, with a fifth still on the stand when the court recessed for the day.
The state first called Transylvania County Register of Deeds Beth Landreth, who identified the marriage certificate obtained by Hoxit and Nelms' ex-wife when the two were wed in August 2025.
During cross-examination, Landreth testified that she knew "of" the Hoxit family – with Lindsay noting that the family was from Transylvania County – but Landreth said she did not know them personally.
Landreth also testified that nothing false was identified by her office personnel when the marriage certificate was acquired.
Holloway was called next. She was asked to identify Hoxit's sworn oath of office for Graham County Sheriff – which was signed Dec. 5, 2022 – and also recognized the divorce decree of Nelms and his former wife.
During cross-examination, Holloway said she had known Hoxit since he first became a member of the N.C. State Highway Patrol – a role Hoxit retired from after 27 years of service. Holloway echoed Lindsay's sentiment that Hoxit had a reputation of being "law-abiding," adding that she has always had a "good working relationship" with Hoxit.
N.C. Department of Insurance Criminal Investigations Western Commander Leonard Stump was called to the stand next. Stump said he received a call Jan. 20, in which a meeting was requested between Stump and Hoxit in Robbinsville. Stump arrived the following day for the meeting, which originally consisted of himself, Hoxit, former chief deputy Travis Brooks and N.C. Department of Insurance Regional Director Ken Green.
Stump testified that Hoxit soon asked for a one-on-one meeting, which he estimated lasted over two hours and was "90%" about Nelms. Hoxit asked for updates on the case, praising the work N.C. Department of Insurance Special Investigator Jasmine Hanline had done on the matter to that point.
Hoxit was unsure why prosecution had not occurred, with Stump stating that "to his knowledge, there would not be any prosecution," though the commander was unsure why. Stump went on to say he had just taken over as commander of the Western division in November, so he was still familiarizing himself with cases in the territory – which covers any area of North Carolina west of I-77.
Before the meeting concluded, Hoxit gave Stump the personal cell number of Welch – stating that she was on-board with pursuing the prosecution of Nelms.
Stump testified that he clarified this claim by Hoxit, which the sheriff affirmed.
When Stump left the meeting, he opted to instead call a special prosecutor with the Department of Insurance and never called Welch. It was later said that the Department of Insurance learned about the marriage of Hoxit and Nelms' ex-wife through Frank Vines with the N.C. State Bureau of Investigation and that the Department of Insurance had elected not to prosecute, due to a "personal conflict" that was not divulged.
Hanline's testimony split the morning and afternoon sessions. She said the Department of Insurance was first notified of Nelms' allegedly not performing his duties as building inspector by Sam Whittington with the N.C. Office of State Fire Marshal; an investigation began in May 2025.
Hanline first worked locally with former Graham County Sheriff's Office Det. Graham Page on the case and learned that a tracking order on Nelms' vehicles had already been acquired. She said the investigation lasted between 4-5 months, which Hanline said had found that Nelms had approved the installation of electrical boxes via photographs sent through text messages.
The agent later recounted her September, in-person interview with Nelms and his attorney, Zeyland McKinney, in Gastonia. Hanline said she learned of the marriage the night prior to the meeting, as Hoxit reached out to offer the information.
Hanline said that Nelms was "cooperative" during the meeting, with Nelms contending that the practice of confirming pictures as passing inspection was allowed during COVID. It was during the same meeting that Hanline presented a subpoena for Nelms' personal cell phone, which was later turned over to Page for data extraction at the sheriff's office. She said there were "several hundred" text messages, but testified that it would be "excessive" to print all of them off.
Hoxit attempted to call Hanline on Jan. 8, with the agent returning the call the following day. She described the conversation as "brief" and said the District Attorney's office had said the investigation could continue. Hanline also said Hoxit wanted to meet with the Department of Insurance's special investigator – a request Hanline said she would pass along.
'Secret' recording
The final individual to testify was Burrows. Much of her time on the witness stand was spent listening to a meeting between Hoxit and Welch, which took place Jan. 6 in the Macon County Courthouse. Burrows said she was asked by Welch to record the meeting, with the device capturing the audio in a chair next to Welch.
Though Lindsay questioned why the meeting being recorded was not disclosed to Brooks or Hoxit, Burrows remained stoic on North Carolina's law that covers the topic: the state allows for "one-party consent," per N.C. General Statute 15A-287.
The courtroom listened to the meeting in its entirety, which lasted one hour and 40 minutes. Burrows was also present, as was Brooks.
In the meeting, Welch confronts Hoxit about his failure to disclose the marriage when the two met in August – concerning pulling in assistance from the N.C. Attorney General's Office, regarding the Nelms investigation. The August meeting took place six days after Hoxit and Nelms' former spouse married.
Throughout the meeting, Hoxit told Welch that he is an "open book" and he acted on the advice of his now-former attorney – David Wijewickrama – to not disclose his relationship to Welch.
Welch said she did not like surprises and that she wasn't calling him a liar; rather, she characterized the failure to share the marriage with Welch as a "lie of omission."
Hoxit contended that he did not lie to Welch – even going so far as to say he would put his "hand on the Bible" to prove it – with Welch responding that Wijewickrama gave a different account of events.
"I wanted to tell you," Hoxit said to Welch.
"You should have," Welch replied.
Hoxit later said he didn't want to make a public announcement about the marriage until after the filing period for the 2026 election cycle had concluded, saying he "didn't want any controversy during the primary."
Welch revealed that McKinney was the one who tipped her off as to the marriage, but she was unsure how he learned about the union.
Hoxit admitted that he had not told Wijewickrama or his staff at the sheriff's office.
Burrows was later cross-examined by Lindsay, where she testified to obtaining a copy of the marriage certificate from the Transylvania County Register of Deeds Office by simply going downstairs from her office inside the Macon County Courthouse and having personnel send an electronic request. She did not recall if Welch or Assistant District Attorney Jim Moore asked her to complete the task, but she did give Moore the certificate.
"My marriage has nothing to do with this investigation," Hoxit said. "She has come to me, wanting me to drop this."
"Drop what?," Welch asked.
"This investigation," Hoxit responded. "We have ended our relationship because of this. I'm not going to bend. I will not bend."
"I'm not asking you to bend," Welch said. "I'm not telling you that you shouldn't have reported it. You certainly should. The problem is that you should have stayed out of it. This is why we have the SBI. This is why we have the Department of Insurance. It concerns me that your judgment is so poor, that you still don't understand why this is a problem."
"No, it's not poor. I understand it's an issue," Hoxit replied. "If an attorney or any judge wants to ask me a question, if I've done something unethical, I'm an open book. I have not done anything unethical with this case."
Hoxit also told Welch that any investigation into Nelms by his office would stop.
Just 23 days after Welch and Hoxit met, a motion to have the sheriff removed from office was filed.
Welch's frustration with the lack of transparency was apparent throughout much of the Jan. 6 recording and did reach a high degree of tension in the middle of the meeting.
After Hoxit continued to stand firm on his belief that he was right to carry out the Nelms investigation the way he had – even going so far as to say that he had "very little faith" in the State Bureau of Investigation – Welch offered a sharp retort to his lack of belief in things unseen.
"That still doesn't mean you can just ignore a conflict," Welch said.
"Would the SBI come in and investigate this?," Hoxit asked.
"I don't know, because you didn't ask," Welch responded. "They sure as hell aren't now."