STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
v. Wake County
No. 02 CRS 68987
02 CRS 52699
02 CRS 74185
TONYA DENISE SANDERS,
Defendant.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General
Mary S. Mercer, for the State.
A. Michelle FormyDuval Lynch, for defendant-appellant.
ELMORE, Judge.
Defendant pled guilty on 4 October 2002 to obtaining property
by false pretenses, possession of stolen property, uttering a
forged check, and attaining the status of habitual felon. The
court consolidated the convictions and sentenced defendant within
the presumptive range to a minimum term of 93 months and a maximum
term of 121 months. Defendant filed notice of appeal on the same
date.
Defendant contends (1) the habitual felon indictment is
defective and insufficient to support the sentence; (2) the
indictment charging her with obtaining property by false pretensesis defective; (3) the court should have found mitigating factors;
and (4) her plea was not entered with full knowledge of the
consequences.
We do not address these contentions because defendant does not
have a right to appeal. A defendant who pleads guilty has a
circumscribed right of appeal limited to certain issues, namely:
(1) whether the sentence is supported by the evidence but only when
the defendant's sentence does not fall within the presumptive
range; (2) whether the sentence results from an incorrect finding
of defendant's prior record or prior conviction level; (3) whether
the sentence contains an unauthorized sentence disposition; (4)
whether the term of imprisonment is for a duration not authorized
for the class of offense or prior conviction level; (5) whether the
court properly denied a motion to suppress; and (6) whether the
court properly denied a motion to withdraw the plea. State v.
Jones, N.C. App. , S.E.2d (4 November 2003)(COA02-
1404). None of these situations is present in the case at bar.
Defendant's sentence is within the presumptive range and she is not
appealing from orders denying a motion to suppress or a motion to
withdraw the plea.
In addition, defendant may not seek a writ of certiorari
because she has not lost any right of appeal by failure to take
timely action, she is not seeking to appeal an interlocutory order,
and she is not seeking review of an order denying a motion for
appropriate relief. State v. Dickson, 151 N.C. App. 136, 138, 564
S.E.2d 640, 641 (2002). Because defendant does not have a right to appeal or to seek
a writ of certiorari to raise these issues, this appeal is
dismissed. State v. Nance, 155 N.C. App. 773, 775, 574 S.E.2d 692,
693 (2003). This decision is without prejudice to defendant's
right to file a motion in the trial tribunal seeking appropriate
relief. Id. at 775, 574 S.E.2d at 694.
Dismissed.
Judges TIMMONS-GOODSON and CALABRIA concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***