An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA05-1144
NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS
Filed: 18 April 2006
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
v
.
Buncombe County
Nos. 04 CRS 53048-53074
THOMAS EDWARD SCOTT
Appeal by defendant from judgments entered 5 August 2004 by
Judge Ronald K. Payne in Buncombe County Superior Court. Heard in
the Court of Appeals 9 March 2006.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General
Anne M. Middleton, for the State.
Linda B. Weisel for defendant appellant.
MCCULLOUGH, Judge.
Defendant appeals from judgments entered 5 August 2004 after
defendant pled guilty to two counts of statutory sex offense with
a child under the age of 13 years, seven counts of statutory sex
offense with a person 13, 14, or 15 years old by a defendant at
least six years older, nine counts of sex offense with a student,
and nine counts of indecent liberties. We find no error in part
and remand in part for the correction of clerical errors.
On 3 May 2004, a Buncombe County grand jury indicted defendant
for the offenses of statutory sex offense with a child under the
age of 13, statutory sex offense with a person 13, 14, or 15 by a
defendant at least 6 years older, sex offense with a student, and
indecent liberties with a child. On 3 August 2004, defendantentered a guilty plea to two counts of statutory sex offense with
a child under the age of 13, seven counts of statutory sex offense
with a person 13, 14, or 15 by a defendant at least 6 years older,
nine counts of sex offense with a student, and nine counts of
indecent liberties with a minor. At the hearing for entry of the
guilty pleas, defendant stipulated that there was a factual basis
for the pleas. The following exchange took place in regard to
defendant's prior record level:
[ State]: Does the Defendant also stipulate
that he has one prior record point and would
be a prior record level of II for the purpose
of sentencing, as reflected in the Gold Sheet?
[ Defense attorney]: Yes.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial judge made findings
that defendant had one prior record level and therefore was a
Record Level II for Felony Sentencing. The trial judge then
consolidated the judgments and sentenced defendant to 288-355
months' imprisonment.
Defendant now appeals.
ANALYSIS
I
Defendant contends on appeal that the trial court erred where
there was insufficient evidence to prove defendant's prior record
level for sentencing purposes. We find no merit in this contention.
Under the Structured Sentencing Act, before imposing a felony
sentence, the sentencing judge must determine a defendant's prior
record level pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.14. N.C. Gen.Stat. § 15A-1340.13(b) (2005). A prior conviction, in turn, can be
proven by any of the following methods:
(1) Stipulation of the parties.
(2) An original or copy of the court record of the
prior conviction.
(3) A copy of records maintained by the Division of
Criminal Information, the Division of Motor
Vehicles, or of the Administrative Office of the
Courts.
(4) Any other method found by the Court to be reliable.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.14(f) (2005).
In the instant case, during the hearing for entry of guilty
pleas, the following stipulation occurred:
[State]: Does the Defendant also stipulate
that he has one prior record point and would
be a prior record level of II for the purpose
of sentencing, as reflected in the Gold Sheet?
[Defense counsel]: Yes.
Where defendant stipulated in open court to a prior record point
and the applicable record level for sentencing, the State met its
burden under the statute. See State v. Alexander, 359 N.C. 824,
827-28, 616 S.E.2d 914, 918 (2005) (Where defense counsel's
statement to the trial court constituted a stipulation of
defendant's prior record level pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat.
§ 15A-1340.14(f)(1), defendant's sentence was imposed based upon a
proper finding of defendant's prior record level.).
Therefore, this assignment of error is overruled.
II
We now address defendant's argument on appeal that his
convictions must be vacated where the judgments are not supported
by the indictments for each conviction. We determine that the case
must be remanded to the trial court for a correction of clerical
errors.
A review of the record by this Court reveals that the judgment
contains obvious clerical errors where the offense dates on the
judgments do not reflect the offense dates enumerated on the
indictments. At the plea hearing, defendant stipulated that there
was a factual basis for the plea and further evidence was presented
by the State showing the dates on which the offenses were
committed, the age of the child at the time of each offense, the
age of defendant, and the relationship between the victim and
defendant. Where the judgments should reflect the dates listed on
the indictment and the evidence presented by the State at the
guilty plea hearing we must remand for a correction of those
clerical errors. State v. Murray, 154 N.C. App. 631, 639, 572
S.E.2d 845, 850 (2002), cert. denied, 357 N.C. 467, 586 S.E.2d 778
(2003).
Therefore, on remand the trial court must enter judgment in
accordance with evidence presented in court and the indictments.
III
Further, defendant contends that the trial court violated N.C.
Gen. Stat. § 14-27.7(b) and his constitutional guarantee against
double jeopardy by entering judgment on the indictment for sexoffenses with a student. This issue is not properly before this
Court on appeal and therefore is not addressed.
A defendant is not entitled to appellate review as a matter of
right when he has entered a plea of guilty to a criminal charge in
superior court unless he is appealing sentencing issues or the
denial of a motion to suppress.
State v. Nance, 155 N.C. App. 773,
774, 574 S.E.2d 692, 693 (2003). N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1444(a2)
(2005) sets forth three specific issues which defendant may appeal
as of right: (1) when the sentence imposed results from an
incorrect finding of defendant's prior record or conviction level;
(2) when the sentence imposed contains a sentence disposition not
authorized by statute for the offense, prior record, or conviction
level; and (3) when the sentence imposed contains a term of
imprisonment for a duration of time which is not authorized by
statute for the offense, prior record, or conviction level.
Although N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1444(e) does provide that a
defendant may petition the appellate division for review by writ of
certiorari, defendant has not done so in the instant case, and
therefore, this assignment of error is not properly before this
Court on appeal and is not addressed.
Accordingly, there was sufficient evidence to prove
defendant's prior record level where defendant stipulated to a
prior record point; however, the case must be remanded for
correction of clerical errors.
No error in part; remand for correction of clerical errors.
Judges TYSON and LEVINSON concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***