An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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

NO. COA04-1363

NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS

Filed: 19 July 2005

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

         v.                        Wayne County
                                No. 03 CRS 57329
LAURIE MARIE LEMASTER,
        Defendant.
    

    Appeal by defendant from judgments entered 22 April 2004 by Judge Ernest B. Fullwood in the Superior Court in Wayne County. Heard in the Court of Appeals on 20 June 2005.

    Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Special Deputy Attorney General J. Allen Jernigan, for the State.

    Irving Joyner, for defendant-appellant.

    HUDSON, Judge.

    Defendant Laurie Lemaster was convicted by jury verdict of financial identity fraud and two counts of obtaining property by false pretenses. The trial court sentenced defendant as a prior record level II offender to a presumptive term of 12-15 months imprisonment for the financial identity theft conviction, and two consecutive terms of 6-8 months for the two obtaining property by false pretenses convictions. Defendant appeals. We see no error.
     Appellate counsel for defendant has been unable to identify any issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief on appeal, and asks that this Court conduct its own review of the record for possible prejudicial error. Counsel hasshown to the satisfaction of this Court that he has complied with the requirements of 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, 331 S.E.2d 665 (1985), by advising defendant of her right to file written arguments with this Court and providing her with the documents necessary for her to do so.
    Defendant has filed no written arguments on her own behalf with this Court, and a reasonable time in which she could 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 have found none.
    No error.
    Judges MCGEE and LEVINSON concur.
    Report per Rule 30(e).

*** Converted from WordPerfect ***