State v. Hamilton

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Hamilton

197 S.E.2d 592, 18 N.C. App. 679, 1973 N.C. App. LEXIS 1982

Court of Appeals of North Carolina·Decided July 11, 1973·No. No. 7313SC441·Published

Opinion

MORRIS, Judge.

Defendant’s counsel requests this Court to review the record to determine whether prejudicial error was committed at defendant’s trial. We have carefully reviewed the record and find no error. The bill of indictment was proper in form; the record affirmatively shows that the plea of guilty was freely, understandingly and voluntarily made; and the sentence imposed is within statutory limits. The judgment is

Affirmed.

Judges Brock and Parker concur.

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

MORRIS, Judge.

Defendant’s counsel requests this Court to review the record to determine whether prejudicial error was committed at defendant’s trial. We have carefully reviewed the record and find no error. The bill of indictment was proper in form; the record affirmatively shows that the plea of guilty was freely, understandingly and voluntarily made; and the sentence imposed is within statutory limits. The judgment is

Affirmed.

Judges Brock and Parker concur.

State v. Hamilton, 197 S.E.2d 592, 18 N.C. App. 679, 1973 N.C. App. LEXIS 1982 (N.C. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

197 S.E.2d 592 (State v. Hamilton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.