Opinion
No. COA09-614.
Filed February 2, 2010.
Iredell County Nos. 08 CRS 2560, 08 CRS 50561.
Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 29 August 2008 by Judge Michael Beale in Iredell County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 18 January 2010.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Amanda P. Little, for the State. Appellate Defender Staples Hughes, by Assistant Appellate Defender Emily H. Davis, for defendant-appellant.
Defendant Bonita Sue Anderson appeals from the judgment entered after she pled guilty to breaking and entering, larceny after breaking and entering, and being a habitual felon. The trial court imposed a presumptive-range term of 151 to 191 months imprisonment.
In the appellant's brief, defendant's counsel states that she has been unable to identify any issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief on appeal and asks 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 she 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 her right to file written arguments with this Court and by providing defendant with the documents necessary for her to do so.
On 27 August 2009, defendant filed a pro se brief arguing that her plea was involuntary because she was under the influence of pain medication at the time she entered her plea. Defendant also contends that the trial court erred when it denied her motion to continue and that the prosecutor, trial court, and her own attorney coerced her plea.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1444(a2) (2009) permits defendants to raise three issues in a direct appeal from a guilty plea: (1) whether the trial court correctly calculated the defendant's prior record level, (2) whether the trial court imposed the correct sentence disposition for the defendant's class of offense and prior record level, and (3) whether the trial court imposed the correct term of imprisonment.
In this case, none of the issues raised by defendant in her pro se brief are properly subject to appellate review pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1444(a2), and defendant does not challenge the trial court's jurisdiction. We, therefore, have no authority to address the merits of the issues raised by defendant in her brief. We note that this determination is without prejudice to defendant's filing of a motion for appropriate relief at the trial level. See State v. Jamerson, 161 N.C. App. 527, 530, 588 S.E.2d 545, 547 (2003) (holding that where defendant lacks appeal as of right under § 15A-1444, "[d]efendant may seek post-trial relief through a motion for appropriate relief").
In sum, in accordance with Anders, we have fully examined the record and transcript to determine whether any issues of arguable merit exist or whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. We conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous.
No error.
Judges McGEE and ROBERT HUNTER, JR. concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).