STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Wake County
v. No. 03 CRS 44052-60
03 CRS 44857-60
ANTOINE EDWARD DAVIS 03 CRS 46292
03 CRS 43749
Adrian M. Lapas for defendant.
LEVINSON, Judge.
Judgments were entered 2 April 2004 consistent with
defendant's guilty plea to various charges, including failure to
register as a sex offender. Defendant did not take a timely appeal
from these judgments, but has assigned error to the prior record
level determination utilized by the superior court. In addition,
defendant purports to take a direct appeal as a matter of right
from an order of the superior court, entered 5 October 2004,denying a post-judgment motion.
With respect to the judgments entered 2 April 2004, defendant
argues the trial court erred in its calculation of defendant's
prior record level. We treat defendant's appeal as a petition for
a writ of certiorari, and grant the same. Defendant contends, and
the State agrees, that insufficient evidence was presented to the
trial court to show that defendant's prior out-of-state convictions
were substantially similar to offenses in North Carolina for
purposes of assigning prior record points. See N.C. Gen. Stat. .
15A-1340.14(e) (2003). After reviewing the record in this matter,
we agree, and remand to the trial court for resentencing.
Defendant argues next that the trial court erred by denying
his Motion to withdraw guilty plea. Defendant contends that N.C.
Gen. Stat. . 14-208.11 (2003) is unconstitutional as applied to
out-of-state sex offenders who, like him, moved to North Carolina
and lacked notice of a requirement to register. Defendant's
argument is premised on this Court's opinion in State v. Bryant,
163 N.C. App. 478, 594 S.E.2d 202 (2004).
Even assuming, arguendo, that defendant has a right of appeal
from the order denying his motion to withdraw guilty plea entered
after judgment, see State v. Handy, 326 N.C. 532, 391 S.E.2d 159
(1990), we observe that the North Carolina Supreme Court has
reversed this Court's opinion in Bryant. See State v. Bryant, 359N.C. 554, 614 S.E.2d 479 (2005). Consequently, defendant's
argument is without merit.
Remanded for resentencing.
Judges WYNN and CALABRIA concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***