An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Proced ure.

NO. COA02-1480

NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS

Filed: 3 June 2003

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

         v.                        Alamance County
                                No. 01 CRS 57509
AMADEO RAMIREZ VELAZQUEZ

    Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 19 August 2002 by Judge James C. Spencer, Jr., in Alamance County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 26 May 2003.

    Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Amy C. Kunstling, for the State.

    James M. Bell, for defendant-appellant.

    CALABRIA, Judge.

    Amadeo Ramirez Velazquez (“defendant”) pled guilty to second degree murder. By the terms of the plea agreement, the prosecutor agreed to dismiss pending charges of felony death by motor vehicle and of driving while impaired. Defendant stipulated to a factual basis to support the plea. Judge James C. Spencer, Jr., in Alamance County Superior Court, sentenced defendant within the presumptive range to a minimum term of 129 months and a maximum term of 164 months in the custody of the North Carolina Department of Correction, in accordance with the plea agreement.
    Defendant's sole contention is that the court erred by accepting his plea. He argues an insufficient showing of malice was made. He also submits that as a person who does not speakEnglish, he did not understand that he was admitting his acts constituted malice.
    We do not address the merits of defendant's contention. “[A] defendant who has entered a plea of guilty is not entitled to appellate review as a matter of right, unless the defendant is appealing sentencing issues or the denial of a motion to suppress, or the defendant has made an unsuccessful motion to withdraw the guilty plea.” State v. Pimental, 153 N.C. App. 69, 73, 568 S.E.2d 867, 870, disc. review denied, 356 N.C. 442, 573 S.E.2d 163 (2002). In the case at bar, defendant does not contest the sentence imposed or any order denying a motion to suppress or motion to withdraw the plea. Furthermore, defendant was provided with a Spanish-speaking interpreter, who interpreted the proceedings for defendant. We therefore allow the State's motion to dismiss the appeal.
    Appeal dismissed.
    Judges MARTIN and McCULLOUGH concur.
    Report per Rule 30(e).

*** Converted from WordPerfect ***