Opinion
No. COA09-1221
Filed 4 May 2010 This case not for publication
Appeal by Defendant from judgment entered 13 April 2009 by Judge Paul L. Jones in Greene County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 12 April 2010.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Teresa L. Townsend, for the State. Appellate Defender Staples Hughes, by Assistant Appellate Defender David W. Andrews, for Defendant.
Greene County No. 07 CRS 700429.
On 4 August 2007, Defendant Kareem Kabbar Webb was issued a citation for driving while license revoked. On 14 December 2007, Defendant pled guilty to the charge in Greene County District Court. On that same day, Defendant appealed to superior court. On 10 March 2008, in Greene County Superior Court, Defendant pled no contest to the charge of driving while license revoked. On 14 July 2008, Defendant was sentenced to a prison term of 120 days, but the term was suspended and Defendant was placed on 12 months supervised probation.
On 17 October 2008, Defendant's probation officer filed a probation violation report alleging five separate probation violations by Defendant. A probation revocation hearing was held on 13 April 2009.
At the beginning of the hearing, Defendant moved to continue the case. Defense counsel told the court that he had been appointed to represent Defendant on 9 March 2009, but
this is the first time that [Defendant] has met with me and talked with me about his case. I am aware of what the violations are and he has explained to me the circumstances, but he's asked me to continue this case. The Probation Officer, I think, is opposed to it as is the State, but I present that to the Court.
The trial court asked why Defendant wished to continue the case. Defense counsel explained:
Your Honor, he says he [has] some other matters in Statesville, I believe it is, that he has to take care of first, Your Honor. He's asking the case be continued. I told him I would make the motion and let Your Honor decide that.
The trial court denied the motion.
The prosecutor summarized the violations in the probation report. According to the report, Defendant failed to report for scheduled office visits with his probation officer on 22 and 29 September 2008; was in arrears in paying court costs and supervision fees; had absconded; and had been terminated from his employment. Defendant's probation officer provided background information concerning each of the violations. Through counsel, Defendant admitted the violations, although he attempted to explain his conduct.
At the end of the hearing, the trial court found that Defendant had committed each of the violations alleged in the violation report; that each violation was willful; and that each violation, in and of itself, provided a sufficient basis for revocation of Defendant's probation. The trial court revoked Defendant's probation and activated Defendant's original sentence of 120 days in prison.
On appeal to this Court, Defendant's appellate counsel states that after careful review of the transcript, file, and the law, he "is unable to identify an issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief on appeal[,]" and requests that this Court "conduct a full examination of the record on appeal for possible prejudicial error and to determine whether the undersigned overlooked any justiciable issue."
By letter dated 2 November 2009, counsel advised Defendant of counsel's inability to find error, of his request that this Court conduct an independent review of the record, and of Defendant's right to file his own arguments directly with this Court. Counsel sent copies of the transcript, record, and brief to Defendant. Defendant has not filed his own written arguments.
Defendant's counsel has substantially complied with the holdings of 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). Pursuant to those decisions, we must determine from a full examination of the proceedings whether the appeal is "wholly frivolous[.]" Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 18 L. Ed. 2d at 498. To aid us in this endeavor, Defendant's counsel has raised the following two potential issues: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying defendant's motion to continue; and (2) whether sufficient evidence was presented to show that Defendant violated the terms of his probation.
Upon careful examination of the entire record, including the two issues raised by Defendant's counsel, we determine that there are no justiciable issues, and this appeal is therefore wholly frivolous.
AFFIRMED.
Judges ERVIN and BEASLEY concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).