An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA03-314


Filed: 6 January 2004

                            Forsyth County
CORTEZ ANTWUN MCINTYRE            No. 02 J 254

    Appeal by juvenile from an order entered 16 September 2002 by Judge Victoria L. Roemer in Forsyth County District Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 4 December 2003.

    Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Elizabeth L. Oxley, for the State.

    James N. Freeman, Jr., for juvenile-appellant.

    TYSON, Judge.

    Cortez Antwun McIntyre (“juvenile”) appeals from an adjudication order finding him delinquent for felonious possession of stolen goods.

I. Background
    On 2 June 2002, Justin Tallman (“Tallman”) drove his black 1997 Toyota Camry (“vehicle”) to a club on Country Club Road in Winston-Salem, North Carolina and arrived around 11:30 p.m. Tallman exited the club at around 1:30 a.m. to find that his vehicle was missing from the parking lot. Tallman notified the club's security, who contacted the police. Tallman gave a statement to the police upon their arrival.
    Winston-Salem Police Officer Jeff Broome (“Officer Broome”), was on routine patrol that night and spotted an occupied vehicle sitting in a park with its lights out. Officer Broome called his supervisor, approached the car, and found the vehicle occupied by four people, including the juvenile. Officer Broome ran the tag number and was advised that the vehicle had been reported stolen. Both the driver and the juvenile told Officer Broome they did not know the car was stolen and that they had borrowed it from a friend.
    After all the evidence had been presented at the probable cause hearing, the State and the juvenile's counsel were asked if they wished to be heard. The juvenile's counsel proceeded to reiterate the evidence against her client and asked the court to find the juvenile “not guilty.” The court found probable cause to believe that the juvenile committed the offense of felonious possession of stolen property.
    An adjudicatory hearing was held later that day. At the end of the evidence, the juvenile's counsel again argued the evidence and asked that the court find the juvenile “not guilty.” The State made no statement and rested on its evidence. The juvenile was found to be responsible for felonious possession of stolen property.
    II. Issue
    The sole issue on appeal is whether the trial court committed reversible error by not granting the juvenile's motions to dismiss at the close of the State's evidence and after all the evidence had been presented.
III. Waiver
    The juvenile contends that the trial court erred in not granting his motions to dismiss. We decline to review the juvenile's assignment of error.
    North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 10(b)(3) provides that a defendant who fails to move to dismiss an action at the close of all of the evidence may not challenge on appeal the sufficiency of the evidence to prove the crime charged. N.C.R. App. P. 10(b)(3) (2003); see also State v. Spaugh, 321 N.C. 550, 552, 364 S.E.2d 368, 370 (1988).
    The juvenile's counsel failed to move to dismiss at any point during the probable cause hearing or the adjudicatory hearing. The juvenile's counsel merely requested that the court find the juvenile “not guilty” of felonious possession of stolen goods.
    This Court has held that:
        [Rule 10(b)(1)] is directed to matters which occur at trial and upon which the trial court must be given an opportunity to rule in order to preserve the question for appeal. The purpose of the rule is to require a party to call the court's attention to a matter upon which he or she wants a ruling before he or she can assign error to the matter on appeal.

State v. Hargett, 157 N.C. App. 90, 93, 577 S.E.2d 703, 705 (2003) (quoting State v. Canady, 330 N.C. 398, 401, 410 S.E.2d 875, 880 (1991)). No motions to dismiss the charge of felonious possession of stolen goods were made by the juvenile. The trial court could not err by failing to grant a motion the juvenile never made. The juvenile has waived his right to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence on appeal. N.C.R. App. P. 10(b)(3) (2003).
IV. Conclusion
    The juvenile waived his assignment of error. This appeal is dismissed.
    Judges HUDSON and STEELMAN concur.
    Report per Rule 30(e).

*** Converted from WordPerfect ***