State v. Phillips

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Phillips

185 S.E.2d 240, 13 N.C. App. 226, 1971 N.C. App. LEXIS 1204

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedDecember 15, 1971

DocketNo. 7130SC755

StatusPublished

This text of 185 S.E.2d 240 (State v. Phillips) 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. Phillips, 185 S.E.2d 240, 13 N.C. App. 226, 1971 N.C. App. LEXIS 1204 (N.C. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

MALLARD, Chief Judge.

Defendant’s appeal from his plea of guilty presents for review only the question of whether error appears on the face of the record proper. State v. Roberts, 279 N.C. 500, 183 S.E. 2d 647 (1971).

The defendant in his assignment of error asserts that prior to being sentenced, an unnamed probation officer “expressed an opinion to the defendant that if the defendant accepted an active sentence, said defendant would not receive more than six (6) months imprisonment.” This assignment of error is not supported by an exception entered in the record. Neither does the record on appeal filed in this case support such an assignment of error. Therefore, this assignment of error properly presents no question for review. State v. Greene, 278 N.C. 649, 180 S.E. 2d 789 (1971) ; State v. Fox, 277 N.C. 1, 175 S.E. 2d 561 (1970).

The appeal of the defendant presents only the record proper for review, and the record reveals that the trial judge made careful inquiry of the defendant as to the voluntariness of his plea after having adequately advised him of the consequences. Then the trial judge, upon competent and sufficient evidence, found and adjudicated that the defendant freely, understandingly and voluntarily entered a plea of guilty. See State v. Hunter, 279 N.C. 498, 183 S.E. 2d 665 (1971). No prejudicial error appears on the face of the record proper. The appeal is adjudged to be frivolous.

No error.

Judges Hedrick and Graham concur.

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

MALLARD, Chief Judge.

Defendant’s appeal from his plea of guilty presents for review only the question of whether error appears on the face of the record proper. State v. Roberts, 279 N.C. 500, 183 S.E. 2d 647 (1971).

The defendant in his assignment of error asserts that prior to being sentenced, an unnamed probation officer “expressed an opinion to the defendant that if the defendant accepted an active sentence, said defendant would not receive more than six (6) months imprisonment.” This assignment of error is not supported by an exception entered in the record. Neither does the record on appeal filed in this case support such an assignment of error. Therefore, this assignment of error properly presents no question for review. State v. Greene, 278 N.C. 649, 180 S.E. 2d 789 (1971) ; State v. Fox, 277 N.C. 1, 175 S.E. 2d 561 (1970).

The appeal of the defendant presents only the record proper for review, and the record reveals that the trial judge made careful inquiry of the defendant as to the voluntariness of his plea after having adequately advised him of the consequences. Then the trial judge, upon competent and sufficient evidence, found and adjudicated that the defendant freely, understandingly and voluntarily entered a plea of guilty. See State v. Hunter, 279 N.C. 498, 183 S.E. 2d 665 (1971). No prejudicial error appears on the face of the record proper. The appeal is adjudged to be frivolous.

No error.

Judges Hedrick and Graham concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

185 S.E.2d 240, 13 N.C. App. 226, 1971 N.C. App. LEXIS 1204, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-phillips-ncctapp-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack