Opinion
No. COA13–60.
2013-07-2
STATE of North Carolina v. Jeffery Dean NOBLES.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Donna D. Smith, for the State. Winifred H. Dillon for Defendant.
Appeal by Defendant from judgment entered 7 September 2012 by Judge Christopher W. Bragg in Davidson County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 24 June 2013. Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Donna D. Smith, for the State. Winifred H. Dillon for Defendant.
STEPHENS, Judge.
On 8 December 2010, Defendant Jeffery Dean Nobles entered guilty pleas to charges of extortion and violation of a domestic violence protective order. In accordance with a plea agreement, the trial court sentenced Defendant to an active term for violating the domestic violence protective order and a suspended term of 36 to 53 months imprisonment for the charge of extortion. The trial court placed Defendant on supervised probation for 36 months.
On 24 February 2012, a probation violation report was filed alleging that Defendant had both tested positive for and admitted to using cocaine. Additionally, the report alleged that Defendant had been convicted of felony possession of cocaine and was in arrears on the monetary conditions of his probation.
On 7 September 2012, the trial court held a probation violation hearing in Davidson County Superior Court. Defendant admitted violating the terms of his probation. The court found that Defendant willfully violated the terms of his probation by testing positive for cocaine and by being convicted of felony possession of cocaine. Accordingly, the court revoked Defendant's probation and activated his sentence. Defendant appeals.
Counsel appointed to represent Defendant on appeal has been unable to identify any issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief on appeal. Appellate counsel has asked that this Court conduct its own review of the record for possible prejudicial error pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967) and State v. Kinch, 314 N.C. 99, 331 S.E.2d 665 (1985). Counsel has also shown to the satisfaction of this Court that she has complied with the requirements of Anders and Kinch by advising Defendant of his right to file written arguments with this Court and providing him with the documents necessary for him to do so.
On 14 March 2013, Defendant's appellate counsel filed a petition for writ of certiorari, seeking review of possible errors in Defendant's original 2010 sentencing. This Court denied that petition by order entered 18 March 2013, and the 2010 sentencing is not before us on direct review.
Defendant has not filed any written arguments on his own behalf with this Court, and a reasonable time in which he could have done so has passed. In accordance with Anders and Kinch, we have fully examined the record on appeal, but have been unable to find any possible prejudicial error. Accordingly, the judgment revoking Defendant's probation is
AFFIRMED. Judges McGEE and ELMORE concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).