An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA05-233


Filed: 06 September 2005


         v.                        Cumberland County
                                No. 02 CRS 060679

    Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 14 October 2004 by Judge Gregory A. Weeks in Cumberland County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 08 August 2005.

    Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General John G. Barnwell, for the State.

    Linda B. Weisel, for defendant-appellant.

    STEELMAN, Judge.

     Defendant pled guilty on 14 October 2004 to common law robbery. The plea agreement provided for imposition of a sentence of 17-21 months to run concurrently with a sentence defendant was then serving. Defendant was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement. On 21 October 2004 defendant, pro se, filed a handwritten “Motion for Notice of Appeal.” The trial court treated the document as a notice of appeal and appointed counsel to represent him on appeal.
    Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to 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). Counsel states that “[a]fter repeated and closeexamination 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.” She requests this Court to “conduct a full examination of the record on appeal for possible error to determine whether any justiciable issue has been overlooked by counsel.” Counsel has attached to the brief a letter she wrote to defendant advising him of her inability to find error and of his right to file his own written arguments. Defendant has not filed any written arguments.
    A defendant who pleads guilty is limited to an appeal of the matters set forth in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1444. State v. Jamerson, 161 N.C. App. 527, 528-29, 588 S.E.2d 545, 546-47 (2003). After carefully reviewing the record, we are unable to find anything to support a meaningful argument of an appealable issue. Defendant's sentence is in the presumptive range; the prior record level, sentence disposition and sentence duration are correct and authorized by law; and no order denying a motion to suppress or allowing defendant withdraw his guilty plea appears in the record.
    The appeal is dismissed.
    Chief Judge MARTIN and Judge HUNTER concur.
    Report per Rule 30(e).

*** Converted from WordPerfect ***