Opinion
No. COA11–1034.
2012-05-15
STATE of North Carolina v. Jermaine Lurice CLEMONS, Defendant.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Kathleen N. Bolton, for the State. Danielle Blass for defendant-appellant.
Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 7 April 2011 by Judge Franklin F. Lanier in Harnett County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 30 April 2012. Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Kathleen N. Bolton, for the State. Danielle Blass for defendant-appellant.
GEER, Judge.
On 7 April 2011, defendant Jermaine Lurice Clemons pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to attempted robbery with a dangerous weapon, possession of a firearm by a felon, and having attained habitual felon status. The trial court sentenced defendant in accordance with the plea agreement from the mitigated range to a term of 70 to 93 months imprisonment.
Counsel appointed to represent defendant asserts 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 his right to file written arguments with this Court and providing him with the documents necessary for him to do so.
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, we have fully examined the record to determine whether any issues of arguable merit exist.
By virtue of his guilty plea, defendant's right of appeal was limited to the sentencing issues set forth in N.C. Gen.Stat. § 15A–1444(a1) and (a2) (2011). Here, defendant stipulated to his prior convictions and prior record level. Furthermore, defendant received the specific mitigated-range sentence provided for in his plea agreement. Accordingly, we find no prejudicial error, conclude the appeal is wholly frivolous, and affirm the judgment entered.
We note that the State filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on 6 October 2011. The basis of that motion was the limited right to appeal from a guilty plea. Given defendant's prior application for review under Anders, that motion is denied.
Affirmed. Judges BRYANT and ROBERT N. HUNTER, JR., concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).