An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA03-1237


Filed: 4 May 2004


         v.                        Cumberland County
                                No.    02 CRS 063658
PATRICK LEE GLENN                        

    Appeal by defendant from judgment dated 27 February 2003 by Judge Gregory A. Weeks in Superior Court, Cumberland County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 19 April 2004.

    Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Richard Votta, for the State.

    Michael J. Reece, for defendant appellant.

    McGEE, Judge.

    Defendant was found guilty of assault by pointing a gun in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-34 (2003). The trial court imposed a suspended sentence of sixty days and placed defendant on supervised probation for twenty-four months. By order entered 23 April 2003, our Court allowed defendant's petition for writ of certiorari to review the judgment of the trial court.
    Counsel appointed to represent defendant has stated he has been unable to identify any issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief on appeal. He asks that this Court conduct its own review of the record for possible prejudicial error. Counsel has shown to the satisfaction of this Court that hehas complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), and State v. Kinch, 314 N.C. 99, 331 S.E.2d 665 (1985), by advising defendant of his right to file written arguments with this Court and providing him with the documents necessary to do so. Defendant has not filed any written arguments on his own behalf with this Court, and a reasonable time for him to have done so has passed.
    In accordance with Anders, we have fully examined the record to determine whether any issues of arguable merit appear therefrom and whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. We conclude the appeal is frivolous. Furthermore, we have examined the record for possible prejudicial errors and have found none.
    No error.
    Chief Judge MARTIN and Judge BRYANT concur.
    Report per Rule 30(e).

*** Converted from WordPerfect ***