NO. COA02-725
Appeal by defendant from judgments dated 28 November 2001 by
Judge Henry W. Hight, Jr. in Wake County Superior Court. Heard in
the Court of Appeals 30 December 2002.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Special Deputy Attorney
General W. Dale Talbert for the State.
John T. Hall for defendant appellant.
GREENE, Judge.
Gabriel Roman Stallings (Defendant) appeals from sentences
imposed on a 28 November 2001 judgment entered consistent with a
jury verdict finding him guilty of four counts of robbery with a
dangerous weapon and one count of attempted common law robbery.
The trial court determined Defendant had a prior record level
of IV, made no findings of aggravation or mitigation, and sentenced
Defendant to 11 to 14 months imprisonment for the attempted common
law robbery conviction, a Class H felony, and 117 to 150 months for
each of the robbery with a dangerous weapon convictions, Class D
felonies.
_______________________________
The issue is whether a trial court may impose upon a Defendant
the maximum sentence within the presumptive range without making
findings in aggravation.
Defendant contends he is entitled to a new sentencing hearing
because the trial court failed to make findings in aggravation.
Although Defendant concedes each of his sentences falls within the
presumptive range, he argues because each of his sentences also
falls within the lowest of the aggravated sentencing ranges, the
trial court should have made findings in aggravation.
(See footnote 1)
We
disagree.
A judgment sentencing a defendant to a term of imprisonment
for the commission of a felony must contain both a minimum term of
imprisonment and a maximum term of imprisonment. N.C.G.S. § 15A-
1340.13(c) (2001). Unless otherwise indicated, “[t]he maximum term
of imprisonment applicable to each minimum term of imprisonment is
. . . as specified in G.S. 15A-1340.17.”
Id. The trial court is
to determine the applicable maximum term of imprisonment by
utilizing the chart found in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.17(e).
N.C.G.S. § 15A-1340.17(e) (2001). “[W]here the trial court imposes
sentences within the presumptive range for all offenses of which
defendant was convicted, he is not obligated to make findings
regarding aggravating and mitigating factors."
State v. Rich, 132N.C. App. 440, 452-53, 512 S.E.2d 441, 450 (1999),
aff'd. 351 N.C.
386, 527 S.E.2d 299 (2000).
Defendant, with a prior record level of IV, was sentenced to
a minimum term of 117 months and a maximum term of 150 months for
each Class D felony of robbery with a dangerous weapon and a
minimum of 11 months and a maximum of 14 months for the Class H
felony of attempted common law robbery. The maximum sentence
specified under section 15A-1340.17(e) for a minimum term of 117
months is 150 months and for a minimum term of 11 months is 14
months. N.C.G.S. § 15A-1340.17(e). The charts contained in 15A-
1340.17(c) and (e) show the trial court, as required by the
statutes, sentenced Defendant within the presumptive range of
sentences for Class D felonies with prior record level IV; and,
therefore, the trial court was not required to make findings in
aggravation.
See State v. Streeter, 146 N.C. App. 594, 598, 553
S.E.2d 240, 243 (2001). Accordingly, the trial court did not err
in sentencing Defendant.
Affirmed.
Judges TIMMONS-GOODSON and TYSON concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
Footnote: 1 Defendant also contends the application of the Structured
Sentencing Act in this case violated both his due process and equal
protection rights. These constitutional arguments, however, were
not raised in the trial court, and we do not address them here.
See State v. Benson, 323 N.C. 318, 321-22, 372 S.E.2d 517, 519
(1988) (constitutional questions cannot be raised for the first
time on appeal).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***