An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA04-1637


Filed: 2 August 2005


         v.                        New Hanover County
                                No. 02 CRS 20177

    Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 25 February 2004 by Judge Jack W. Jenkins in New Hanover County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 18 July 2005.

    Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Mary S. Mercer, for the State.

    Thomas S. Hicks for defendant-appellant.

    MARTIN, Chief Judge.

    Defendant was found guilty by a jury of communicating threats. The trial court imposed an intermediate punishment, suspending a sentence of 45 days' imprisonment and placing defendant on supervised probation for twenty-four months. Defendant gave notice of appeal in open court.
    On appeal, defendant argues that the trial court's denial of his motion for a continuance deprived him of his right to effective assistance of counsel.     To the extent defendant assigns error to the trial court's ruling, he has failed to preserve this issue for appellate review. Although he claims to have moved for a continuance in chambers, defendant has not transcribed the in-chambers proceedings; nor did he place the matter on the record at trial. “This Court's review on appeal is limited to what is in the record or in the designated verbatim transcript of proceedings. An appellate court cannot assume or speculate that there was prejudicial error when none appears on the record before it.” State v. Moore, 75 N.C. App. 543, 548, 331 S.E.2d 251, 254 (1985) (citing N.C.R. App. P. 9). There is no evidence before this Court that defendant moved for a continuance or that he asserted a constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel as the grounds therefor. Moreover, the record does not reflect either the court's denial of a motion for continuance or the basis for the court's ruling. “[O]ur Court may not speculate as to any prejudicial error. Based on the record before us, we can find no prejudicial error and therefore overrule defendant's . . . assignment of error.” State v. McBride, 109 N.C. App. 64, 69, 425 S.E.2d 731, 734 (1993).
    To the extent defendant alleges that he received ineffective assistance of counsel due to inadequate pretrial preparation, we conclude that the materials of record do not permit a full review of this claim on direct appeal. See State v. Fair, 354 N.C. 131, 167, 557 S.E.2d 500, 525 (2001), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1114, 153 L. Ed. 2d 162 (2002). Accordingly, we dismiss the claim without prejudice to defendant's right to raise it in a motion for appropriate relief filed in superior court. Id. at 167, 557 S.E.2d at 525.
    The record on appeal contains additional assignments of errornot addressed by defendant in his brief to this Court. Pursuant to N.C.R. App. P. 28(b)(6), we deem them abandoned.
    No error.
    Judges HUNTER and STEELMAN concur.
    Report per Rule 30(e).

*** Converted from WordPerfect ***