An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA05-1691

NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS

Filed: 5 July 2006

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

         v.                        McDowell County
                                Nos. 03 CRS 54707
FREDRICK JOHN DAY, JR.,                    03 CRS 54774
            Defendant.
    

    Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 28 July 2004 by Judge Zoro J. Guice, Jr. in the Superior Court in McDowell County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 26 June 2006.

    Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Joan M. Cunningham, for the State.

    Gregory A. Newman, for defendant-appellant.

    HUDSON, Judge.

    On 28 July 2004, Frederick John Day, Jr. (“defendant”) pled guilty, pursuant to an Alford plea, to robbery with a dangerous weapon and assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury. The charges were consolidated and defendant was sentenced to 77 to 102 months imprisonment. Defendant appeals. We conclude that there was no error.
    Defendant's appellate counsel states that he “is unable to identify an issue to support any proper grounds for a direct appeal in this matter.” As such, defense counsel asks this Court to fully review the record for possible prejudicial error. We conclude that defense counsel has complied with the requirements of 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), by advising defendant of his right to file written arguments with this Court and providing him with the documents necessary for him to do so. Defendant has not filed any written arguments on his own behalf with this Court, and a reasonable time has passed in which he could have done so.
    In accordance with Anders and Kinch, we must fully examine the record to determine whether any issues of arguable merit appear therefrom or whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. At the outset, we note that because defendant pled guilty and was sentenced within the presumptive range, defendant's appeal is limited. Specifically, under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1444 (2004), a defendant who has pled guilty has a right to appeal only the following issues: (1) whether the sentence is supported by the evidence (if the minimum term of imprisonment does not fall within the presumptive range); (2) whether the sentence results from an incorrect finding of the defendant's prior record level under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.14 or the defendant's prior conviction level under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.21; (3) whether the sentence contains a type of sentence not authorized by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.17 or § 15A-1340.23 for the defendant's class of offense and prior record or conviction level; (4) whether the sentence contains a term of imprisonment that is for a duration not authorized by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.17 or N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.23 for the defendant's class of offense and prior record or conviction level under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1444(a2)(3); (5)whether the trial court improperly denied the defendant's motion to suppress; or (6) whether the trial court improperly denied the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea. State v. Jamerson, 161 N.C. App. 527, 528-29, 588 S.E.2d 545, 546-47 (2003). In accordance with Anders, we have conducted our own examination of the record for possible prejudicial error under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1444 and have found none.
    No error.
    Judges MCCULLOUGH and STEELMAN concur.
    Report per Rule 30(e).

*** Converted from WordPerfect ***