An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA03-137

NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS

Filed: 20 April 2004

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

v .                         Durham County
                            No. 96 CRS 17537-17544
DONNIE COATS LEE

    Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 28 June 2000 by Judge Orlando F. Hudson, Jr., in Durham County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 17 March 2004.

    Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Special Attorney General Elizabeth Leonard McKay, for the State.

    Kevin P. Bradley for defendant-appellant.

    MARTIN, Chief Judge.

    In 1997, defendant and Adrian Bruce Howard were convicted of multiple felony offenses arising out of a home invasion which occurred on 13 June 1996 in Durham County. Defendant and Howard appealed their convictions and, by opinion filed 15 June 1999, this Court found error and granted a new trial. State v. Howard & State v. Lee, 133 N.C. App. 614, 515 S.E.2d 740 (1999). Upon remand, defendant entered pleas of guilty to second degree kidnaping, first degree burglary, two counts of second degree sexual offense, and two counts of assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury. The pleas were entered pursuant to a plea arrangement which provided for the reduction of three charges, dismissal of two other felony charges arising out of the same incident, andconsolidation of the charges to which defendant was pleading guilty into one judgment, resulting in defendant receiving a minimum sentence of 121 months. The trial court determined defendant's prior record points to be eighteen and that he had a prior record level of V. The trial court entered a judgment in which it consolidated the offenses and sentenced defendant to imprisonment for a minimum term of 121 months and a maximum term of 155 months, within the presumptive range of sentences for one having a prior record level of V.
    On 9 April 2002, defendant filed a petition for writ of certiorari; by order dated 24 April 2002, this Court allowed the petition for the purpose of reviewing the prior record level determination made by the trial court in its 28 June 2002 judgment. Having done so, we find no reason to disturb the judgment and affirm.

________________________________________
    
    N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.14(f) (2003) provides that “[t]he State bears the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that a prior conviction exists and that the offender before the court is the same person as the offender named in the prior conviction.” A defendant's prior convictions may be proved by:
    (1)    Stipulation of the parties.
    (2)    An original or copy of the court record of the prior conviction.
    (3)    A copy of records maintained by the Division of Criminal Information, the Division of Motor Vehicles, or of the Administrative Office ofthe Courts.
    (4)    Any other method found by the court to be reliable.

Id.
    Included in the record, and marked as a State's exhibit, is a printout by the Division of Criminal Information (“DCI”) listing prior convictions of Donald Earl Lee, Donnie Coats Lee and Donald Howard. Alias names of Donald E. Lee, Earl Lee, Donnie Coats Lee, Donal E. Lee, Coats Lee and Donnie Lee are listed as well as two social security numbers used by the defendant. The printout also contains a detailed description of the defendant including his fingerprint identifier number and scar and tattoo locations. The same FBI number and SID number is listed for both Donald Earl Lee and Donnie Coats Lee. The DCI computerized record is a proper method to prove defendant's prior convictions under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.14(f)(3). State v. Rich, 130 N.C. App. 113, 116, 502 S.E.2d 49, 51 (1998). By introducing the DCI record showing Donald Earl Lee and Donnie Coats Lee with the same identification numbers, the State carried its burden of proving that Donald Earl Lee was the same person as the defendant.
    While it is unclear from the record whether Donald Howard is another alias of the defendant, only one prior record point, for a misdemeanor, was attributed to the defendant under this name. Prior convictions for Donald Earl Lee and Donald Coats Lee on the DCI printout account for sixteen prior record level points, sufficient for Level V status. An additional point was added to the record for commission of an offense while on probation. Thus,even assuming arguendo that Donald Howard is not the same person as defendant, subtraction of the one point attributed to him under that name would not affect the prior record level finding of Level V.
    No error.
    Judges HUDSON and GEER concur.
    Report per Rule 30(e).

*** Converted from WordPerfect ***