Opinion
No. 826SC411
Filed 2 November 1982
Appeal and Error 45; Criminal Law 159.1, 166 — filing stenographic transcript of trial proceedings — dismissal for failure to follow rules Because of defendant's failure to observe the requirements of G.S. 1A-1, Rule 9(c)(1) and G.S. 1A-1, Rule 28(b)(4) which deal with filing a stenographic transcript of the trial proceedings in lieu of a narration of the evidence, defendant's appeal was subject to dismissal.
APPEAL by defendant from Tillery, Judge. Judgment entered 4 June 1980 in Superior Court, HALIFAX County. Certiorari allowed by the Court of Appeals on 16 November 1981. Heard in the Court of Appeals 21 October 1982.
Attorney General Edmisten, by Assistant Attorney General Elizabeth C. Bunting, for the State.
Appellate Defender Adam Stein, by Assistant Appellate Defender Malcolm R. Hunter, Jr., for defendant appellant.
Defendant appeals from a judgment of imprisonment entered upon his conviction of armed robbery.
Pursuant to Rule 9(c)(1), Rules of Appellate Procedure, defendant chose to file a stenographic transcript of the trial proceedings in lieu of a narration of the evidence. The appendix attached to his brief contains none of the material from the transcript essential to an understanding of three of the four assignments of error brought forward. It is at least questionable whether the appendix material with regard to the remaining assignment suffices for a full understanding of the question presented.
Defendant thus has not complied with Rule 28(b)(4), Rules of Appellate Procedure, which provides that when the stenographic transcript is used in lieu of a narration of the evidence, "if there are portions of the transcript which must be reproduced verbatim in order to understand a question presented in the brief . . . such verbatim portions of the transcript shall be attached as appendixes to the brief."
As we noted in State v. Greene, 59 N.C. App. 360, 361, 296 S.E.2d 802 (1982): "Failure to observe the requirements of Rule 28(b)(4) constitutes a substantial impediment to the capacity of this Court to perform its functions. `Rules of Appellate Procedure are mandatory and failure to observe them is grounds for dismissal of the appeal.'" See also State v. Nickerson, 59 N.C. App. 236, 296 S.E.2d 298 (1982); State v. Wilson, 58 N.C. App. 818, 294 S.E.2d 780 (1982).
Because of defendant's failure to observe the requirements of Rule 9(c)(1) and Rule 28(b)(4), the appeal is dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.
Judges VAUGHN and WELLS concur.