Opinion
No. COA10-318
Filed 1 March 2011 This case not for publication
Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 17 June 2009 by Judge Linwood O. Foust in Mecklenburg County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 21 February 2011.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Terence D. Friedman, for the State. Paul Y. K. Castle for defendant-appellant.
Mecklenburg County Nos. 07 CRS 229866, 62003, 07 CRS 232534-41.
Defendant Charles Ford appeals from a judgment entered by the trial court based upon Defendant's pleas of guilty to six counts of felonious breaking or entering, three counts of felonious larceny after breaking or entering, and having attained the status of an habitual felon. At the ensuing sentencing hearing, the trial court consolidated Defendant's convictions for judgment, determined that he had amassed 9 prior record points and should be sentenced as a Level IV offender, found that no aggravating factors and certain mitigating factors existed, and ordered that Defendant be imprisoned for a minimum term of 85 months and a maximum term of 111 months in the custody of the North Carolina Department of Correction. For the reasons set forth below, we find no error in the trial court's judgment.
The record on appeal does not contain a complete copy of the trial court's findings in aggravation and mitigation, so that we are unable to determine the identity of the mitigating factors that the trial court found to exist. However, given that the sentence imposed by the trial court was clearly within the mitigated range, it is obvious that the trial court concluded that the factors in mitigation outweighed the factors in aggravation at Defendant's sentencing hearing.
Counsel appointed to represent Defendant on appeal has been unable to identify any issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for appellate relief and has requested that this Court conduct its own review of the record for possible prejudicial error. Counsel has also shown to the satisfaction of this Court that he has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967), and State v. Kinch, 314 N.C. 99, 331 S.E.2d 665 (1985), by advising Defendant of his right to file written arguments with this Court and by providing Defendant with the documents necessary for him to do so.
Defendant has not filed any written arguments on his own behalf with this Court despite the fact that a reasonable period of time within which he could have done so has elapsed. In accordance with Anders, we have fully examined the record to determine whether any issues of arguable merit exist. At the conclusion of that process, we have been unable to find any basis for contending that the trial court committed prejudicial error and conclude that Defendant's appeal is wholly frivolous. For that reason, we find no basis for disturbing the trial court's judgment.
AFFIRMED.
Judges STEPHENS and BEASLEY concur.
Reported per Rule 30(e).