An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA04-52
NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS
Filed: 5 October 2004
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
v. Wilson County
Nos. 03 CRS 51244
TERRANCE WAYNE LYTLE 03 CRS 51245
Appeal by defendant from judgments entered 4 September 2003 by
Judge Frank R. Brown in Wilson County Superior Court. Heard in the
Court of Appeals 4 October 2004.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General
Tammera S. Hill, for the State.
Lisa Skinner Lefler, for defendant-appellant.
TYSON, Judge.
Terrance Wayne Lytle (defendant) appeals the denial of his
motion to withdraw his guilty plea. We affirm.
I. Background
On 12 May 2003, the Wilson County grand jury indicted
defendant on two counts of felonious breaking and entering, one
count of injury to real property, and one count of felonious
larceny. Defendant subsequently entered a guilty plea pursuant to
a plea arrangement on 23 July 2003 to two counts of breaking and
entering, and the State agreed not to proceed with the other cases
currently pending before this Court. Judge Frank R. Brown
accepted defendant's plea and entered prayer for judgment continued
until 4 September 2003. At the sentencing hearing, the State prayed judgment on the
two offenses. Defense counsel informed the trial court that
defendant had written numerous letters to him in which defendant
indicated he did not understand what he was doing when he entered
the plea, was not satisfied with [defense counsel's] services at
that point, . . . and would like to strike that guilty plea and go
to trial. Judge Brown denied the motion and imposed two
consecutive sentences of eight to ten months imprisonment. From
the trial court's judgments, defendant appeals.
II. Issue
Defendant contends the trial court erred by denying his motion
to withdraw his guilty plea.
III. Withdrawal of Guilty Plea
Defendant argues the trial court should have allowed his pre-
sentencing motion to withdraw his guilty plea under the any fair
and just reason analysis found in State v. Handy, 326 N.C. 532,
538, 391 S.E.2d 159, 162 (1990).
As a general rule, a motion to withdraw a guilty plea made
before sentencing should be granted with liberality. The trial
court should allow a defendant to withdraw his guilty plea upon his
showing that any fair and just reason exists for such relief.
Id. at 537-39, 391 S.E.2d at 162. Factors for the trial court to
consider in ruling on the motion are:
whether the defendant has asserted legal
innocence, the strength of the State's proffer
of evidence, the length of time between entry
of the guilty plea and the desire to change
it, and whether the accused has had competent
counsel at all relevant times. Misunderstanding of the consequences of a
guilty plea, hasty entry, confusion, and
coercion are also factors for consideration.
Id. at 539, 391 S.E.2d at 163 (citations omitted). In reviewing a
motion to withdraw a guilty plea, this Court makes an independent
review of the record. Id.
After review of the factors cited in Handy, defendant was not
entitled to withdraw his plea. Unlike the defendant in Handy,
defendant here did not assert his legal innocence. The State's
forecast of the evidence in defendant's case was very strong.
Defendant gave a statement to police about break-ins in Wilson
following his arrest in a neighboring county. He pointed out the
locations of the break-ins and provided information which led to
the recovery of two guns stolen during one of the break-ins.
Two terms of court and six weeks time elapsed between entry of
defendant's guilty plea and his sentencing hearing. While defense
counsel referred to receiving numerous letters from defendant in
that interim, he did not state when or how often defendant had
indicated that he did not understand what he was doing when he
entered the plea . . . . The record contains no indication of any
specific concerns that defendant had with the plea. The record
does contain defendant's handwritten pro se notice of appeal filed
four days after sentencing along with an accompanying request for
his file in these cases. Within a week of sentencing, defendant
sent correspondence to the Wilson County Clerk of Superior Court
challenging the amount of credit he received for days spent in
confinement prior to the date of the judgments. Defendant entered his plea approximately two and one-half
months after being indicted. He had appointed counsel at the time
of entry of his guilty plea on 23 July 2003 and at the time of
entry of the judgments on 4 September 2003. His assertions of
misunderstanding of his guilty plea and dissatisfaction with his
counsel are contrary to his sworn responses found in the transcript
of plea. There is no explanation of the nature of defendant's
misunderstanding. In the transcript of plea, defendant stated his
counsel had explained the charges to him and that he understood
those charges. Defendant responded that he was satisfied with his
counsel's services and was aware of his right to be tried by a
jury. He admitted his guilt and denied that anyone had caused him
to enter his plea against his wishes. Defendant also acknowledged
his awareness of the total punishments for the two charges.
IV. Conclusion
Applying the
Handy factors to the facts at bar, defendant has
not proffered a fair and just reason why he should be allowed to
withdraw his guilty plea. 326 N.C.
537-39, 391 S.E.2d at 162. The
trial court did not err by denying his motion and imposing
sentences upon his guilty plea. Defendant has not cited any
authority, stated any reason, or presented argument in support of
his two remaining assignments of error. They are deemed abandoned.
See N.C.R. App. P. 28(b)(6) (2004). The trial court's judgment and
sentence are affirmed.
Affirmed.
Judge WYNN and GEER concurs.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***