State v. Draughn

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Draughn

192 S.E.2d 32, 16 N.C. App. 426, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 1726

Court of Appeals of North Carolina·Decided October 25, 1972·No. No. 7212SC727·Published

Opinion

PARKER, Judge.

Since defendant pleaded guilty, this appeal presents for review only the question whether error appears on the face of the record proper. State v. Roberts, 279 N.C. 500, 183 S.E. 2d [427]*427647. We have carefully examined the record, and no error appears. The bill of indictment was in all respects regular; the court was properly organized; the trial judge properly examined defendant before accepting his plea and found that the plea of guilty was freely, understanding and voluntarily made; there was plenary evidence to support these findings; and the sentence imposed was within statutory limits.

After careful review of the record, we find

No error.

Judges Campbell and Morris concur.

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

PARKER, Judge.

Since defendant pleaded guilty, this appeal presents for review only the question whether error appears on the face of the record proper. State v. Roberts, 279 N.C. 500, 183 S.E. 2d [427]*427647. We have carefully examined the record, and no error appears. The bill of indictment was in all respects regular; the court was properly organized; the trial judge properly examined defendant before accepting his plea and found that the plea of guilty was freely, understanding and voluntarily made; there was plenary evidence to support these findings; and the sentence imposed was within statutory limits.

After careful review of the record, we find

No error.

Judges Campbell and Morris concur.

State v. Draughn, 192 S.E.2d 32, 16 N.C. App. 426, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 1726 (N.C. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

192 S.E.2d 32 (State v. Draughn) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related