A decision without a published opinion is authority only in the case in which such decision is rendered and should not be cited in any other case in any court for any other purpose, nor should any court consider any such decision for any purpose except in the case in which such decision is rendered. See Rule of Appellate Procedure 30 (e)(3).

NO. COA01-592

NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS

Filed: 2 April 2002

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

         v.                        Wake County
                                Nos. 00 CRS 2133
REGINALD LORENZO DUNN,                    00 CRS 10361
    Defendant-Appellant.

    Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 14 November 2000 by Judge Ronald L. Stephens in Wake County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 11 March 2002.

    Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Special Deputy Attorney General Robert O. Crawford, III, for the State.

    Richard E. Jester for defendant-appellant.

    BRYANT, Judge.

    Defendant Reginald Lorenzo Dunn entered an Alford plea, pursuant to a plea agreement, to second degree rape and having attained habitual felon status. In accordance with the plea agreement, the trial court sentenced defendant to a presumptive term of 121-155 months imprisonment. 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, 386U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493, reh'g denied, 388 U.S. 924, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1377 (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 or whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. We conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Furthermore, we have examined the record for possible prejudicial error and found none.
    No error.
    Judges WYNN and THOMAS concur.
    Report per Rule 30(e).

*** Converted from WordPerfect ***