STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
v. Mecklenburg County
No. 03 CRS 216984
ALVAN BERNARD POWELL
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General
Douglas W. Corkhill, for the State
William B. Gibson for defendant-appellant.
ELMORE, Judge.
Defendant was convicted of possessing cocaine and sentenced to
six to eight months imprisonment. The sentence was suspended and
defendant placed on supervised probation for thirty-six months.
Defendant appeals.
Counsel appointed to represent defendant has filed an Anders
brief in which he indicates he has been unable to identify an 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 acknowledges that
he has not sent to the defendant copies of the transcript of the
trial, the Brief, Record on Appeal, or Appellate Information
Statement. Counsel states that he has attempted to correspond withthe defendant, but has been unable to do so. Specifically, he
states in his brief that he wrote defendant on 29 June 2004, but
the letter was returned to sender with no forwarding address.
Defendant's trial counsel, William Soukup, indicated to counsel
that within two days of the conclusion of trial, defendant was
taken into custody by immigration authorities. Soukup believed
that defendant was later deported to his home country of Jamaica.
This Court has stated that:
As a general rule, the defendant must be given
“the necessary documents to conduct his own
review of the case,” . . . and “time . . . to
raise any points [with the appellate court]
that he chooses.” However, delivery of the
necessary documents to the defendant is not
required if the defendant's attorney has,
after a diligent effort, been unable to locate
the defendant and deliver the documents.
State v. Mayfield, 115 N.C. App. 725, 726-27, 446 S.E.2d 150, 152
(1994)(citations omitted).
In the instant case, defendant's attorney has used all due
diligence in attempting to notify defendant of his right to pursue
his appeal pro se, and the fault of counsel's failure to so notify
defendant must lie with defendant. Accordingly, defendant's
counsel has fully complied with the holding in Anders, and the
appeal is ripe for appellate review upon the record and briefs
before us.
In accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 18 L.
Ed. 2d 493, reh'g denied, 388 U.S. 924, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1377 (1967)
and State v. Kinch, 314 N.C. 99, 102, 331 S.E.2d 665, 667 (1985),
we have fully examined the record to determine whether any issuesof arguable merit appear therefrom. We have been unable to find
any possible prejudicial error and conclude that the appeal is
wholly frivolous.
No error.
Judges BRYANT and GEER concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***