Whether the Court of Appeals erred in reversing dismissal of a claim for negligence at the 12(b)(6) stage based on contributory negligence and in affirming dismissal of a claim for punitive damages.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred by determining the trial court committed plain error by instructing the jury once on first-degree forcible sexual offense where the defendant was indicted for two counts of first-degree forcible sexual offense.

Whether substitution of an alternate juror during guilt deliberations in a criminal trial violates a defendant's constitutional right to a jury of twelve.

Whether defendant satisfied the prejudice prong for plain error where a law enforcement officer testifying as a lay witness gave his opinion regarding defendant's intent at the time of an accident.

Whether the Court of Appeals' majority erred in holding that the trial court did not commit structural error in denying defendant's court-appointed counsel's motion to withdraw for defendant to hire counsel of his own choosing.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in reversing the superior court's order in which it determined that petitioners are entitled to receive adoption assistance benefits several years after the adoption was finalized.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding that a land developer was not entitled to the benefit of permit choice based on its determination of application completeness and the existence of a now-expired moratorium.

Whether unacceptable personal conduct provided just cause for termination of a state employee.

Whether the Business Court erred in ruling that the parties' intrafamilial dispute fell outside the scope of their arbitration agreement with Charles Schwab.

Whether the federal PREP Act preempts all state law claims, including those brought under the state constitution.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the denial of the University's motion to dismiss plaintiffs' breach of contract claims.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred by affirming the trial court's decision to classify a tract of land as defendant's separate property.

Whether defendant's J.E.B. claim is preserved and whether the claim was procedurally barred.

Whether the Court of Appeals conducted an appropriate review of the sentencing court's conclusion that defendant's sentence was constitutionally sufficient under Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012).

Whether the trial court complied with N.C.G.S. 15A-1242 where it informed a defendant who sought to proceed pro se only of the harshest sentences he faced and miscalculated the maximum sentence by two years, but both the potential sentence and the actual sentence amounted to life in prison.

Whether the trial court erred in limiting cross-examination of the State's expert witness.

Whether the trial court complied with N.C.G.S. 15A-1242 where it
informed a defendant of a miscalculated the maximum sentence.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in determining that the trial court did not err in (1) denying defendant's motion to dismiss the charge under N.C.G.S. 90-95(h)(4) and (2) instructing the jury that opioids were included in the definition of 'opium or opiate' under N.C.G.S. 90-95(h)(4).

Whether the sentencing court's findings of the mitigating factors under N.C.G.S. 15A-1340.19B support defendant's juvenile sentence to life without parole, and whether defendant's claims under J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B., 511 U.S. 127 (1994) are procedurally barred under N.C.G.S. 15A-1419(a)(3).