STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Rutherford County
v. Nos. 04 CRS 53801
05 CRS 1331
MARK ALAN SHORT
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General
Kathryne E. Hathcock, for the State.
Leslie C. Rawls for defendant-appellant.
CALABRIA, Judge.
Mark Alan Short (defendant) appeals from his guilty plea of
felony fleeing to elude arrest and attaining habitual felon status.
We find no error.
On 20 July 2004, Corporal Aldridge (Aldridge) of the
Rutherford County Sheriff's Department discovered defendant
operating a 1989 Toyota with a stolen New York license plate.
Aldridge then pursued defendant and attempted to stop him; however,
defendant failed to stop and crossed the state border into Cherokee
County, South Carolina, where he eventually brought the car to a
stop and proceeded to jump a fence into a wooded area. Officers
then pursued defendant into the neighboring wooded area andarrested him.
Based on these facts, the State sought, and the Grand Jury
subsequently returned, indictments on the charges of felony eluding
arrest and attaining habitual felon status. On 8 September 2005,
pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant pled guilty to felony
fleeing to elude arrest and to attaining habitual felon status.
The plea agreement provided that defendant would be sentenced to
the mitigated range of 80 to 105 months for his prior record level
IV. In accordance with the plea agreement, the trial court
sentenced defendant
to 80 to 105 months in the North Carolina
Department of Correction. Defendant appeals.
Defendant's counsel states that she is unable to identify an
issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for
relief on appeal
and asks this Court to
review the record for
possible prejudicial error.
Counsel has shown to the satisfaction
of this Court that she has complied with the requirements of Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493, 498, reh'g
denied, 388 U.S. 924, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1377 (1967), and State v. Kinch,
314 N.C. 99, 102, 331 S.E.2d 665, 667 (1985), by advising defendant
of his right to file written arguments with this Court and
providing him with the necessary documents. Defendant has not
filed any written arguments on his own behalf with this Court and
a reasonable time in which he could have done so has passed.
In accordance with Anders, we must fully examine the record to
determine whether any issues of arguable merit appear therefrom or
whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. Anders, 386 U.S. at 744,18 L. Ed. 2d at 498. We conclude the appeal is wholly frivolous.
In reaching this conclusion, we have conducted our own examination
of the record for possible prejudicial error and have found none.
No error.
Chief Judge MARTIN and Judge JACKSON concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***