Opinion
No. COA16-23
07-05-2016
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. TIMOTHY WOODS
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Kimberly N. Callahan, for the State. Andrew Yu, for defendant.
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. Alamance County, Nos. 13CRS57662-63 Appeal by defendant from judgments entered 13 August 2015 by Judge Michael J. O'Foghludha in Alamance County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 20 June 2016. Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Kimberly N. Callahan, for the State. Andrew Yu, for defendant. DIETZ, Judge.
Defendant Timothy Woods appeals the revocation of his probation. His counsel filed an Anders brief asserting that counsel could not identify any non-frivolous arguments for appeal. After an independent review of the record, we agree and therefore affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
On 5 June 2014, Woods pleaded guilty to two counts of selling cocaine, two counts of possession with intent to sell or deliver cocaine, and two counts of possession of drug paraphernalia. The trial court consolidated the charges into two judgments and sentenced Woods to consecutive sentences of 10 to 21 months in prison. The court suspended the sentences and placed Woods on 24 months of supervised probation.
Woods repeatedly violated the terms of his probation in the two years following his sentencing by absconding, committing and then pleading guilty to a driving while impaired offense, and failing to pay any of his court debt or probation supervision fees. On 13 August 2016, at the revocation hearing, Woods conceded that he committed these violations (through his counsel), but asked for leniency so that he would not be separated from his children.
Following the hearing, the trial court found that Woods willfully violated the conditions of his probation, revoked Woods's probation, and activated his suspended sentences.
Wood did not give notice of appeal at the revocation hearing but came before the court the following week and indicated that he wanted to appeal. The trial court ordered the clerk to prepare appellate entries at that time.
On 15 February 2016, Woods filed a petition for a writ of certiorari seeking leave to pursue an appeal. Woods acknowledged in his petition that his oral notice of appeal the week after his revocation hearing did not satisfy the requirements of Rule 4 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. In our discretion, we allow Woods's petition for a writ of certiorari and address the merits of his appeal.
Analysis
Counsel appointed to represent Woods on appeal has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), indicating that counsel "is unable to identify any issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief on appeal." Woods's counsel asks this Court to conduct its own review of the record for possible prejudicial error. Counsel has filed documentation with the Court showing that he has complied with the requirements of Anders and State v. Kinch, 314 N.C. 99, 331 S.E.2d 665 (1985), by advising Woods of his right to file written arguments with the Court and providing him with a copy of all documents pertinent to his appeal.
Woods has not filed any written documents on his own behalf with this Court, and a reasonable time for him to do so has expired. In accordance with Anders, we have fully examined the record and have not identified any possible prejudicial error. Accordingly, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
Conclusion
We affirm the trial court's judgments.
AFFIRMED.
Judges ELMORE and DAVIS concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).