An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA05-213

NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS

Filed: 17 January 2006

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

         v.                            Wake County
                                    Nos. 04CR56403
RANDY LLOYD                                04CR53540-41
    

    Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 18 August 2004 by Judge Robert Rader in Wake County District Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 9 January 2006.

    Attorney General Roy A. Cooper, III, by Special Deputy Attorney General Gayl M. Manthei, for the State.

    George E. Kelly, III for defendant-appellant.

    HUNTER, Judge.

    Randy Lloyd (“defendant”) appeals from a judgment and sentence of the trial court entered upon his plea of guilty to breaking and entering a motor vehicle, felony larceny, assault with a deadly weapon, and two misdemeanor charges of hit and run. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
    Defendant pled guilty in Wake County District Court. The trial court consolidated the charges for judgment and, pursuant to the plea agreement, sentenced defendant to eight to ten months imprisonment, suspended the sentence, and placed defendant on supervised probation for thirty-six months. Defendant appeals.    Defendant first contends the trial court committed plain error in entering judgment in the 03CR67400 hit and run because “there was no pleading and no factual basis to accept defendant's plea.” Although defendant alleges plain error in the corresponding assignment of error in the record, “he provides no explanation, analysis or specific contention in his brief supporting the bare assertion that the claimed error is so fundamental that justice could not have been done.” State v. Cummings, 352 N.C. 600, 636, 536 S.E.2d 36, 61 (2000). Without any argument in support of plain error, “defendant has effectively failed to argue plain error and has thereby waived appellate review.” Id. at 637, 536 S.E.2d at 61. Moreover, our Supreme Court has noted that plain error review is limited to jury instructions and evidentiary rulings. State v. Gregory, 342 N.C. 580, 584, 467 S.E.2d 28, 31 (1996). Because plain error review is neither argued nor available, defendant has not preserved this issue for appellate review.
    Defendant also contends the trial court committed plain error in sentencing him as a prior record level II. Defendant argues the State did not prove he was a prior record level II pursuant to the North Carolina sentencing statutes. Defendant again does not argue plain error and has waived appellate review. Nevertheless, we note that the State presented evidence in the form of a stipulation by the parties, which is one of the several methods the State may use to prove prior convictions pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.14(f) (2003). The record specifically shows that the prosecutor and defendant's attorney signed a 18 August 2004 writtenstipulation, in which the parties stipulated to the list of defendant's prior convictions and agreed upon defendant's prior record level of II. Accordingly, this assignment of error is without merit.
    Affirmed.
    Chief Judge MARTIN and Judge STEELMAN concur.
    Report per Rule 30(e).

*** Converted from WordPerfect ***