An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA04-1483


Filed: 15 November 2005


    v.                            Davidson County
                                Nos. 03 CRS 3881
JOHN GARY YOKLEY,                        03 CRS 52172
        Defendant.                    03 CRS 52173

    Appeal by defendant from judgments entered 21 April 2004 by Judge Kimberly S. Taylor in Davidson County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 26 September 2005.

    Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Special Deputy Attorney General William H. Borden, for the State.

    Appellate Defender Staples Hughes, by Assistant Appellate Defender Matthew D. Wunsche, for defendant-appellant.

    GEER, Judge.

    Defendant John Gary Yokley pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to possession with intent to sell or deliver cocaine, possession with intent to sell or deliver marijuana, and to having attained habitual felon status. In accordance with the plea agreement, the trial court consolidated the offenses into one judgment and sentenced defendant as a Class C felon to a mitigated term of 80 to 105 months imprisonment. Defendant appeals.
    Defendant's counsel states that "[a]fter repeated and close examination of the record and review of relevant law, counsel is unable to identify an issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief on appeal" and asks this Court toreview the record for possible prejudicial error.
    Counsel has shown 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, 87 S. Ct. 1396, reh'g denied, 388 U.S. 924, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1377, 87 S. Ct. 2094 (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 documents necessary for him to do so. Defendant has not filed any written arguments on his own behalf with this Court, and a reasonable time in which he could have done so has passed.
    In accordance with Anders, we must fully examine the record to determine whether any issues of arguable merit appear therefrom or whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. We conclude the appeal is wholly frivolous. In reaching this conclusion, we have conducted our own examination of the record for possible prejudicial error and have found none. We hold defendant had a fair trial, free from prejudicial error.

    No error.

    Judges BRYANT and ELMORE concur.

    Report per Rule 30(e).

*** Converted from WordPerfect ***