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. COA01-1064

NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS

Filed: 4 June 2002

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

         v.                            Alleghany County
                                    No. 00 CRS 935
CARLIS PAUL WHITAKER    

    Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 20 March 2001 by Judge William Z. Wood, Jr., in Alleghany County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 28 May 2002.
    Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Christopher W. Brooks, for the State.

    Donna L. Shumate for defendant appellant.

    McCULLOUGH, Judge.
    On 26 September 2000, defendant Carlis Paul Whitaker was tried and convicted in Alleghany County District Court upon a citation charging him with contributing to the delinquency of a juvenile, in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-316.1. Defendant appealed to Alleghany County Superior Court for a trial de novo from the judgment pronounced. A jury found defendant guilty of contributing to the delinquency of a juvenile, and the trial court sentenced defendant to 120 days' imprisonment. Defendant appeals.
    Defendant's counsel states that she is unable to find errors allowing appeal, and asks this Court to review the record for possible prejudicial error.
    Counsel has shown to the satisfaction of this Court that hehas complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.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 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 must fully examine the record to determine whether any issues of arguable merit appear therefrom or whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. We conclude the appeal is wholly frivolous. In reaching this conclusion, we have conducted our own examination of the record for possible prejudicial error and have found none.

    We hold defendant had a fair trial, free from prejudicial error.
    No error.
    Chief Judge EAGLES and Judge TIMMONS-GOODSON concur.
    Report per Rule 30(e).

*** Converted from WordPerfect ***