An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA05-804
NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS
Filed: 15 November 2005
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
v. Caldwell County
Nos. 04 CRS 5020
JEFFREY SCOTT LUNSFORD 04 CRS 5021
04 CRS 5022
Appeal by defendant from judgments entered 7 April 2005 by
Judge Beverly T. Beal in Caldwell County Superior Court. Heard in
the Court of Appeals 10 November 2005.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General
Kathleen U. Baldwin, for the State.
Haakon Thorsen, for defendant-appellant.
TYSON, Judge.
Jeffrey Scott Lunsford (defendant) appeals from judgments
entered revoking his probation and activating his sentences of 120
days, 120 days, and forty-five days imposed on convictions of
simple possession of a Schedule IV controlled substance, driving
while license revoked, and misrepresentation to obtain employment
security benefits. We affirm judgments in case numbers 04 CRS 5020
and 04 CRS 5021. We remand judgment in case number 04 CRS 5022
for
correction of clerical errors.
I. Anders Brief
Defense counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). Counsel states
that he has repeatedly and closely examined the record and has beenunable to identify an issue which will support a meaningful
argument for relief. He requests this Court to review the record
for possible error. Counsel has attached to defendant's brief a
copy of a letter he wrote to defendant advising him that he had
filed a brief on defendant's behalf, that he had been unable to
identify any issue to present on appeal, and that he had requested
this Court to review the record for possible prejudicial error.
Counsel also advised defendant of his right to file his own written
arguments. Defendant has not filed his own written arguments.
After carefully reviewing the record on appeal and the transcript,
we are unable to find any support for a meaningful appeal. The
judgments in case numbers 04 CRS 5020 and 04 CRS 5021 are affirmed.
II. Correction of Clerical Errors
We concur with defense counsel that the judgment imposed in
case number 04 CRS 5022 on the counts of misrepresentation to
obtain employment security benefits contains a clerical error in
that it incorrectly states the originating county as Alexander
instead of Catawba. The same judgment incorrectly identifies the
original sentencing judge as Theodore Royster instead of K. Dean
Black. These errors do not impact the judgment imposed by the
court and are harmless. In order for the court's records to be
correct and to avoid any confusion, we remand case number 04 CRS
5022 to the Caldwell County Superior Court for corrections to the
judgment.
Affirm judgments in case numbers 04 CRS 5020 and 04 CRS 5021;
Remand for corrections judgment in case number 04 CRS 5022.
Judges MCCULLOUGH and ELMORE concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***