State v. Allen

STEELMAN

Appeal by defendant from judgments entered 25 June 2012 by Judge Paul Jones in Pender County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 22 April 2013. Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Teresa L. Townsend, for the State. Richard Croutharmel for defendant-appellant.
STEELMAN, Judge.

On 22 August 2011, Samir Jerome Allen (defendant) pled guilty to two counts of driving while impaired in New Hanover County Superior Court. For the first case, the trial court imposed a Level 5 punishment of sixty days imprisonment. That sentence was suspended and defendant was placed on supervised probation for thirty months. Defendant was also ordered to serve one day in the common jail of New Hanover County as a special condition of probation. For the second case, the trial court imposed a Level 1 punishment of two years imprisonment. That sentence was suspended and defendant was placed on thirty months of supervised probation, to run concurrently with the other probation. Defendant was also ordered to serve thirty days in the common jail of New Hanover County as a special condition of probation. Defendant's probation was subsequently transferred to Pender County.

On 20 December 2011, probation violation reports were filed in Pender County alleging that defendant failed to report to his probation officer, was in arrears on the monetary conditions of his probation, failed to obtain a DWI assessment, absconded from supervision, reported to jail with an odor of alcohol about his person, and failed to report for all of his scheduled jail time. On 19 June 2012, two additional probation violation reports were filed, alleging that defendant was convicted of felony possession of cocaine.

On 25 June 2012, a probation violation hearing was held in Pender County Superior Court. Defendant admitted all but one of the alleged violations. The trial court found that defendant willfully violated the terms and conditions of his probation. The trial court revoked defendant's probation and activated his suspended sentences.

Defendant appeals.

Counsel appointed to represent defendant has been unable to identify any issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief on appeal and asks that this Court conduct its own review of the record for possible prejudicial error. Counsel has also shown to the satisfaction of this Court that he has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 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 documents necessary for him to do so.

Defendant has not filed any written arguments on his own behalf with this Court and a reasonable time in which he could have done so has passed. In accordance with Anders, we have fully examined the record to determine whether any issues of arguable merit appear therefrom. We have been unable to find any possible prejudicial error and conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous.

AFFIRMED. Judges BRYANT and McCULLOUGH concur.

Report per Rule 30(e).