Task: songer_respond1_5_3

What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals.
Intervenors who participated as parties at the courts of appeals should be counted as either appellants or respondents when it can be determined whose position they supported. For example, if there were two plaintiffs who lost in district court, appealed, and were joined by four intervenors who also asked the court of appeals to reverse the district court, the number of appellants should be coded as six.
When coding the detailed nature of participants, use your personal knowledge about the participants, if you are completely confident of the accuracy of your knowledge, even if the specific information is not in the opinion. For example, if "IBM" is listed as the appellant it could be classified as "clearly national or international in scope" even if the opinion did not indicate the scope of the business. 

Your task concerns the first listed respondent. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "state government (includes territories & commonwealths)", specifically "other". Your task is to determine which specific state government agency best describes this litigant.

PER CURIAM.
Leo DuBoise, a prisoner of the State of North Carolina, filed his petition in the court below for a writ of habeas corpus alleging that at the time of his trial he “requested that he be put on the stand in his own behalf” and that his counsel “did not want your petitioner to take the stand in his own behalf.”
The District Court, accepting the factual allegations of the petition as true, concluded that they presented no constitutional question and dismissed the petition without requiring the state to answer and without a hearing.
Following dismissal of his petition, DuBoise addressed to one of the individual judges of this court what purports to be a “Petition for Writ of Certiorari,” appearing in the record on appeal, in which he attempts to allege facts in addition to those alleged in his habeas corpus petition.
We affirm the action of the District Court, without prejudice, however, to petitioner’s right to amend his original petition or file a new petition as he may be advised.
Affirmed.

Question: This question concerns the first listed respondent. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "state government (includes territories & commonwealths)", specifically "other". Which specific state government agency best describes this litigant?
A. state of ___ - state in its corporate capacity in criminal cases
B. state 0f ___ - state in its corporate capacity in civil cases
C. other state level activity
D. not ascertained
Answer:

Answer: A