Burke Sheriff turns to civil law to curb crime

After a plethora of calls pertaining to overdoses, drugs, and general criminal activity, Burke County Sheriff Banks Hinceman decided to switch tactics in curbing crime on U.S. 64.

Taking the civil route, Hinceman worked with Alcohol Law Enforcement special agents to deem the location a “nuisance property.”

Generally, a nuisance property refers to a location where the local government has repeatedly serviced the grounds in some way, resulting in a rising cost that eventually becomes a lien against the property after enough calls.

In a criminal capacity, a nuisance property is described in Chapter 19 of the North Carolina General Statutes, which includes drugs, prostitution, gambling, and other “repeated acts which create and constitute a breach of the peace.”

According to Burke County Clerk of Superior Court Crystal Carpenter, nuisance cases are normally filed in civil court by the county or the city.

“Sometimes [the county will] file a lien because they’ve had to go in and mow the grass, clean up the property — whatever,” Carpenter said. “But if it gets to the point like it’s a lot bigger problem with old junk cars or stuff that has to be hauled away, [they] file a lawsuit in Superior Court. They’ll put a judgment against the homeowner, and either they get it cleaned up, they get a judgment, and/or both.”

In February 2025, the Burke County Sheriff’s Office utilized the county’s SWAT team to execute a search warrant at a property on U.S. 64. During that search, officers arrested more than 20 people in the residence and adjacent buildings.

In October, officers arrested another 10 for trespassing, citing a March civil nuisance abatement ruling against the owner. The suit decision came after the increase in calls pushed Hinceman to go the civil court route.

“That’s not something that you use for every problem house,” Hinceman said. “It’s one where it gets to the extreme. To start that nuisance abatement process, you have to get the county attorney involved, and even when you start that, you’re still trying to work with people to correct that behavior.”

As for the legal aspect of the property — in March, after several discussions and a couple of felonies, authorities reached an agreement with the owner of the property, Steven Crockford.

Crockford signed the deed over to his sister and daughter for responsible management upon the agreement that anyone other than the owner and permitted family members would be prohibited from the property.

After a series of arrests on Oct. 10 and 11, the new owners confirmed the nonresidents did not have prior permission to be there. Each person arrested received a misdemeanor first- or second-degree trespassing charge.

“Since we went out there and made those last arrests, I’m not aware of any increase in crime,” Hinceman said. “From that area, I’ll get complaints through telephone calls and email … But that nuisance abatement — that really is a last resort. We try to help these people.”

Hinceman said it is a process they have had at a few other locations, but they often receive permission from landowners, giving the Sheriff’s Office permission to act on their behalf.

“Ultimately, we don’t want to take anybody’s property. We want to continue to try to work with people,” the sheriff said. “At the end of the day, once you get to a point where you don’t think that’s working — that consent agreement — you may have to ask the county attorney to move forward with the process.”

As for residents concerned with civil nuisances, Carpenter suggested, “What I would encourage you to do, if you have a problem with a neighbor like that, you need to get a contact through the city for city code enforcement. If it’s county, you call county code enforcement. Make them aware of the problem, and they’ll come out and investigate. Normally, it’s the town or the city or the county that would file a lawsuit if it gets to that point.”

Steven Crockford could not be reached for comment.