State v. Harrell

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina
DecidedJanuary 21, 2014
Docket13-591
StatusUnpublished

This text of State v. Harrell (State v. Harrell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Harrell, (N.C. Ct. App. 2014).

Opinion

An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.

NO. COA13-591 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS

Filed: 21 January 2014

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

v. Stokes County Nos. 10 CRS 446, 50048-50, 51449 MELVIN CHARLES HARRELL

Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 8 December 2010

by Judge L. Todd Burke in Stokes County Superior Court. Heard

in the Court of Appeals 22 October 2013.

Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Phyllis A. Turner, for the State.

William B. Gibson for defendant-appellant.

BRYANT, Judge.

Because defendant’s felony conviction for escape from jail

was used both to establish his habitual felon status and to

calculate his prior record level in violation of General

Statutes section 14-7.6, we reverse the trial court’s judgment

and remand for resentencing. Because the trial court entered

judgment against defendant on a charge of possession of a -2- firearm by a felon, when no indictment had been entered as to

that charge, we vacate the trial court’s judgment as to that

charge.

On 5 April 2010, under file number 10 CRS 50048, a Stokes

County Grand Jury indicted defendant Melvin Charles Harrell on

the charge of extortion. Under file number 50049, defendant was

indicted on charges of breaking and entering a motor vehicle,

larceny, possession of stolen goods, and larceny of a firearm.

The grand jury also indicted defendant on attaining habitual

felon status; however, on 4 October 2010, a superseding

indictment on attaining habitual felon status was issued under

file number 10 CRS 446. Also, on 4 October 2010, under file

number 10 CRS 51449, the grand jury indicted defendant on the

charge of second-degree murder for the murder of eighty-four

year old Ida Plummer Stilley.

On 8 December 2010, defendant and the State entered into a

plea agreement wherein defendant agreed to plead guilty to

attaining habitual felon status under file number 10 CRS 446;

extortion under file number 10 CRS 50048; breaking and entering

of a motor vehicle, felony larceny, and larceny of a firearm

under file number 10 CRS 50049; possession of a firearm by a

felon under file number 10 CRS 50050; and voluntary -3- manslaughter, reduced from second-degree murder under file

number 10 CRS 51449.

The Honorable L. Todd Burke, Judge presiding, accepted

defendant’s guilty pleas. The trial court credited defendant

with six prior record level points, making him a level three

felon for sentencing purposes. The trial court entered a

consolidated judgment for all convictions and sentenced

defendant to a term of 104 to 134 months.

On 4 December 2012, defendant filed with this Court a pro

se petition for writ of certiorari for review of his sentence.

By order of this Court, defendant’s petition for writ of

certiorari “[was] allowed for the purpose of reviewing the

judgment entered 8 December 2010 . . . limited to those issues

for which Defendant-Petitioner has an appeal of right pursuant

to N.C. Gen. Stat. ' 15A-1444(a2).”1

__________________________________

On appeal, defendant raises the following issues: whether

the trial court erred in (I) calculating defendant’s prior

record level; (II) accepting defendant’s plea in case number 10

1 On 7 June 2013, defendant filed a second petition for writ of certiorari asking for an expanded review of issues defendant brought forth on appeal. Defendant’s second petition for writ of certiorari was denied by this Court on 23 October 2013. See Issues IV, V, and VI. -4- CRS 50050 (possession of a firearm by a felon); (III) finding

substantial similarity between defendant’s out-of-state

convictions and North Carolina felonies; (IV) finding

substantial basis for the convictions to which defendant pled

guilty; and (V) failing to determine whether defendant’s

admissions were made knowingly and voluntarily. Defendant also

argues that he received (VI) ineffective assistance of counsel.

At the outset, we acknowledge that prior to the hearing

date in this Court, defendant filed with this Court a motion to

withdraw his third issue presented on appeal challenging a

conclusion that defendant’s out-of-state convictions were

substantially similar to North Carolina offenses. We allowed

the motion and deem the arguments stricken from defendant’s

brief.

I

Defendant first argues that the trial court erred in

calculating his prior record level and sentencing him as a level

III felon with six prior record level points. Specifically,

defendant contends that the trial court erred by using the same

felony conviction both in its calculation of defendant’s prior

record level and in establishing defendant’s habitual felon -5- status. We agree and also note that the State concedes that

defendant’s argument is correct.

“[T]he trial court's assignment of a prior record level is

a conclusion of law, which we review de novo.” State v. Mack,

188 N.C. App. 365, 380, 656 S.E.2d 1, 12 (2008) (citation

omitted).

“The prior record level of a felony offender is determined

by calculating the sum of the points assigned to each of the

offender's prior convictions that the court . . . finds to have

been proved . . . .” N.C. Gen. Stat. ' 15A-1340.14(a) (2013).

“In determining the prior record level, convictions used to

establish a person's status as an habitual felon shall not be

used.” N.C. Gen. Stat. ' 14-7.6 (2013).

Our General Statutes, section 14-7.1 defines habitual felon

as follows:

Any person who has been convicted of or pled guilty to three felony offenses . . . is declared to be an habitual felon and may be charged as a status offender pursuant to this Article. . . . The commission of a second felony shall not fall within the purview of this Article unless it is committed after the conviction of or plea of guilty to the first felony. The commission of a third felony shall not fall within the purview of this Article unless it is committed after the conviction of or plea of guilty to the second felony. -6- N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-7.1 (2013).

On 4 October 2010, a Stokes County grand jury issued a

superseding indictment under file number 10 CRS 466 charging

defendant with attaining habitual felon status. The following

felony offenses were alleged in the indictment and used to

establish habitual felon status: (1) larceny by conversion, for

which defendant was convicted on 14 November 1986 in Michigan;

(2) escape from jail, for which defendant was convicted on 29

April 1988 in Carter County, Tennessee (case number 9101); and

(3) attempted false pretenses involving property valued over

$100.00, for which defendant was convicted on 16 August 1990.

On 8 December 2010, in accordance with his plea agreement,

defendant pled guilty to attaining habitual felon status. The

State provided judgments for each conviction alleged in the

superseding indictment (file number 10 CRS 466). In calculating

defendant’s prior record level, the trial court scored two prior

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

Related

State v. MacK
656 S.E.2d 1 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2008)
State v. Partridge
579 S.E.2d 398 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2003)
McClure v. State
148 S.E.2d 15 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1966)
State v. Crawford
606 S.E.2d 375 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
State v. Harrell, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-harrell-ncctapp-2014.