Sec. 11-19. Loitering for the purpose of engaging in drug-related activity.
   (a)    Definition. For purposes of this section, "public place" means any area generally accessible to the public for common usage and access, including any street, sidewalk, bridge, alley or alleyway, park, playground, driveway, parking lot or public vehicular area, the doorways and entrance-ways, stairway, hall, courtyard, passageway or common area to any building which fronts on any of those places, or a motor vehicle in or on any of those places or any property owned by the city.
   (b)    It shall be unlawful for a person to remain or wander about in a public place in a manner and under circumstances manifesting the intent to engage in a violation of any subdivision of the North Carolina Controlled Substances Act, G.S. Chapter 90, Article 5. To establish the intent to violate the aforementioned statutes, it must be shown that:
   (1)   Such person is at a location frequented by persons who use, possess or sell drugs; and
   (2)   At least two (2) of the following circumstances exist:
   a.   Repeatedly beckoning to, stopping, or attempting to stop passersby, or repeatedly attempting to engage passersby in conversation; or
   b.   Repeatedly stopping or attempting to stop motor vehicles; or
   c.   Repeatedly interfering with the free passage of other persons; or
   d.   Such person behaves in such a manner as to raise a reasonable suspicion that he or she is about to engage in or is engaged in an unlawful drug-related activity; or
   e.   Such person repeatedly passes to or receives from passersby, whether on foot or in a vehicle, or by courier, money or objects; or
   f.   Such person takes flight upon the approach or appearance of a law enforcement officer.
   (c)    Punishment. Any person who violates this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be fined not more than five hundred dollars ($500.00), or imprisoned for not more than thirty (30) days, or both.
(Ord. of 3-8-94)
   Editors Note: An ordinance of Mar. 8, 1994, did not specifically amend the Code; hence, inclusion of the substantive provisions of such ordinance as 11-19 was at the discretion of the editor.