State v. Crocker

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Crocker

188 S.E.2d 548, 14 N.C. App. 654, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 2212

Court of Appeals of North Carolina·Decided May 24, 1972·No. No. 7214SC323·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

BRITT, Judge.

Defendant’s only assignment of error is that the trial judge in advising defendant as to the consequences of his guilty plea stated that he could be imprisoned for as much as ten years but failed to advise defendant that he could be fined up to $2,000. The question raised was answered by this court contrary to defendant’s contention in the case of State v. Harris, 12 N.C. App. 576, 183 S.E. 2d 864 (1971), in an opinion by Chief Judge Mallard. No worthwhile purpose would be served by repeating the reasoning and authorities set forth in that opinion.

The judgment appealed from is

Affirmed.

Judges Parker and Hedrick concur.

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

BRITT, Judge.

Defendant’s only assignment of error is that the trial judge in advising defendant as to the consequences of his guilty plea stated that he could be imprisoned for as much as ten years but failed to advise defendant that he could be fined up to $2,000. The question raised was answered by this court contrary to defendant’s contention in the case of State v. Harris, 12 N.C. App. 576, 183 S.E. 2d 864 (1971), in an opinion by Chief Judge Mallard. No worthwhile purpose would be served by repeating the reasoning and authorities set forth in that opinion.

The judgment appealed from is

Affirmed.

Judges Parker and Hedrick concur.

State v. Crocker, 188 S.E.2d 548, 14 N.C. App. 654, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 2212 (N.C. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

188 S.E.2d 548 (State v. Crocker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related