State v. Cleaves

166 S.E.2d 861, 4 N.C. App. 506, 1969 N.C. App. LEXIS 1535
Court of Appeals of North Carolina·Decided April 30, 1969·No. 6926SC108·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

*508 Parker, J.

When a defendant voluntarily pleads guilty to a charge of crime, the only questions presented on appeal are whether any error appears upon the face of the record proper and whether the sentences imposed were in excess of statutory limits. State v. Caldwell, 269 N.C. 521, 153 S.E. 2d 34; State v. Darnell, 266 N.C. 640, 146 S.E. 2d 800.

The sole assignment of error in the record is that the punishment imposed was “cruel and unusual under the law and facts of this case.” The assignment is without merit. It is firmly established in our jurisprudence that when the punishment imposed does not exceed the limits fixed by statute, it cannot be considered cruel and unusual in a constitutional sense. State v. Bruce, 268 N.C. 174, 150 S.E. 2d 216; State v. Mosteller, 3 N.C. App. 67, 164 S.E. 2d 27. The sentences imposed upon appellant here did not exceed statutory limits. G.S. 14-3; G.S. 14-107. The court’s authority to provide that such sentences shall run consecutively is also well established. State v. Dawson, 268 N.C. 603, 151 S.E. 2d 203.

No error appears upon the face of this record; the punishment was within limits permitted by law. We find

No error.

Mallard, C.J., and Britt, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

State v. Cleaves, 166 S.E.2d 861, 4 N.C. App. 506, 1969 N.C. App. LEXIS 1535 (N.C. Ct. App. 1969).

166 S.E.2d 861 (State v. Cleaves) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. White
496 S.E.2d 842 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1998)
State v. Martin
197 S.E.2d 58 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1973)
State v. Powell
169 S.E.2d 210 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1969)