State v. Hillman

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Hillman

600 S.E.2d 898, 165 N.C. App. 546, 2004 N.C. App. LEXIS 1343

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedJuly 20, 2004

DocketNo. COA03-1529

StatusPublished

This text of 600 S.E.2d 898 (State v. Hillman) 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. Hillman, 600 S.E.2d 898, 165 N.C. App. 546, 2004 N.C. App. LEXIS 1343 (N.C. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

HUDSON, Judge.

The jury found defendant guilty of assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury, discharging a firearm into occupied property, and attempted robbery with a dangerous weapon. The trial court sentenced defendant to an active prison term of 117 to 150 months for the attempted robbery. It consolidated defendant's remaining convictions and imposed a consecutive sentence of 46 to 65 months. Defendant gave notice of appeal in open court.

Defendant's counsel has been unable to identify any issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief. She asks this Court to conduct its own review of the record forpossible prejudicial error. Counsel has shown to the satisfaction of this Court that she has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), and State v. Kinch, 314 N.C. 99, 331 S.E.2d 665 (1985), by advising defendant of his right to file written arguments with this Court and providing him with the necessary documents. Defendant has not filed any written arguments with this Court in a reasonable time period.

In accordance with Anders, we have fully examined the record to determine whether any issues of arguable merit exist and whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. We have examined the record for possible prejudicial errors and have found none.

No error.

Judges STEELMAN and THORNBURG concur.

Report per Rule 30(e).

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

HUDSON, Judge.

The jury found defendant guilty of assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury, discharging a firearm into occupied property, and attempted robbery with a dangerous weapon. The trial court sentenced defendant to an active prison term of 117 to 150 months for the attempted robbery. It consolidated defendant's remaining convictions and imposed a consecutive sentence of 46 to 65 months. Defendant gave notice of appeal in open court.

Defendant's counsel has been unable to identify any issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief. She asks this Court to conduct its own review of the record forpossible prejudicial error. Counsel has shown to the satisfaction of this Court that she has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), and State v. Kinch, 314 N.C. 99, 331 S.E.2d 665 (1985), by advising defendant of his right to file written arguments with this Court and providing him with the necessary documents. Defendant has not filed any written arguments with this Court in a reasonable time period.

In accordance with Anders, we have fully examined the record to determine whether any issues of arguable merit exist and whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. We have examined the record for possible prejudicial errors and have found none.

No error.

Judges STEELMAN and THORNBURG concur.

Report per Rule 30(e).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

600 S.E.2d 898, 165 N.C. App. 546, 2004 N.C. App. LEXIS 1343, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hillman-ncctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack