STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
v
.
Haywood County
Nos. 95 CRS 4258
KIM LEE BONSTEEL 95 CRS 4259
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General
John G. Barnwell, for the State.
Janna D. Allison for defendant-appellee.
EAGLES, Chief Judge.
This appeal arises from the State's petition for writ of
certiorari seeking review of an order entered 3 January 2001,
modifying the sentence imposed against defendant by a judgment
originally entered on 15 August 1995.
The record tends to establish the following: On 15 August
1995, defendant was convicted of numerous criminal and traffic
offenses, including four counts of assault with a deadly weapon on
a government officer, driving while impaired, failure to stop for
a blue light and siren, reckless driving, speeding to elude, and
resisting arrest. At the time of trial and sentencing, defendant
contended that North Carolina's courts had no jurisdiction or
authority over him. Consequently, defendant waived his right tocounsel, refused to take part in his trial, presented no evidence
of mitigating factors at sentencing, and refused to consent to the
imposition of either community or intermediate punishment. Judge J.
Marlene Hyatt sentenced defendant to imprisonment for four
consecutive 20 to 24 month terms, one for each count of assault on
a government officer. Defendant was also sentenced to consecutive
terms of one year on the DWI and 90 days for all remaining
misdemeanors.
In prison, defendant immediately became a disciplinary problem
and spent the majority of his first eighteen months of
incarceration in full-time lock down. Following his transfer to
another facility, defendant changed his ways and began to take
advantage of the educational and vocational opportunities available
to him. Defendant subsequently became a model prisoner, earning a
vocational diploma in carpentry as well as a degree in electronics
engineering.
On 15 September 2000, defendant filed a motion for appropriate
relief, namely a new sentencing hearing, based on defendant's lack
of understanding of sentencing procedures, and failure to offer
evidence of mitigating circumstances during his original sentencing
hearing. The matter was heard on 3 January 2001 by Judge J. Marlene
Hyatt. At the time of this hearing, defendant had two consecutive
20 to 24 month sentences left to serve. Defendant presented
testimony concerning his academic and vocational achievement in
prison, rehabilitation, remorse, and ties within the community.
Defendant conceded there was no legal basis for granting hismotion under G.S. § 15A-1415(b); rather, defendant contended that
the trial court had the inherent, equitable authority to change
the conditions of the sentence. Following the hearing, the trial
court modified the original judgment, imposing community punishment
for the balance of defendant's original sentence. The State
petitioned for writ of certiorari to review Judge Hyatt's order,
which we granted on 4 May 2001.
The sole issue presented is whether, based on this record, the
trial court had authority to reconsider and modify the terms of
defendant's original judgment and sentence. We conclude the trial
court lacked authority. Accordingly, we vacate the judgment entered
on 3 January 2001.
G.S. § 15A-1415(b) sets forth the only grounds upon which a
motion for appropriate relief may be based when made more than ten
days after the entry of judgment. Moreover, this Court has already
concluded that a trial court does not have authority to resentence
a criminal defendant for discretionary reasons after the expiration
of the session of court in which he was originally sentenced where
no error of law appears upon the face of the judgment. State v.
Bonds, 45 N.C. App. 62, 65, 262 S.E.2d 340, 343, appeal dismissed
and disc. review denied, 300 N.C. 376, 267 S.E.2d 687, cert.
denied, 449 U.S. 883, 66 L. Ed. 2d 107 (1980).
Here, the original judgment was entered over five years before
defendant filed his motion for appropriate relief. Moreover,
defendant concedes that his motion is not based on any of the
grounds enumerated in G.S. § 15A-1415(b), and no errors of lawappear on the face of the original judgment. Applying Bonds, we
hold the trial court lacked authority to modify the sentence
imposed under defendant's original judgment. Accordingly, the
judgment is vacated and the matter is remanded to the superior
court for reimposition of the defendant's original sentence.
Vacated and remanded.
Judges McCULLOUGH and STEELMAN concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***