An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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.
NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS
Filed: 3 October 2006
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
v. Durham County
Nos. 03 CRS 054184
JERRY WAYNE COLCLOUGH 03 CRS 054186
03 CRS 054190
03 CRS 054193
03 CRS 054197
03 CRS 054199
03 CRS 054202
03 CRS 054204
03 CRS 054667
Appeal by defendant from judgments entered 12 September 2005
by Judge Carl R. Fox in Durham County Superior Court. Heard in the
Court of Appeals 2 October 2006.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General
Richard A. Graham, for the State.
Michael J. Reece, for defendant-appellant.
Jerry Wayne Colclough (defendant) appeals judgments entered
after pleading guilty. We affirm.
On 12 September 2005, defendant pled guilty to six counts
conspiracy to sell a Schedule II controlled substance, six counts
of conspiracy to possess with the intent to sell or deliver a
Schedule II controlled substance, two counts of conspiracy to
traffic in cocaine by possession, sale, and transportation, one
count of trafficking in cocaine by possession, and possession ofcocaine with intent to sell or deliver.
The trial court consolidated the offenses into three judgments
and imposed three active terms of imprisonment for a minimum of
thirty-five months and a maximum of forty-two months to run
consecutively. Defendant appeals.
II. Anders v. California
Defense counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), and State v.
Kinch, 314 N.C. 99, 331 S.E.2d 665 (1985). Counsel has stated that
after repeated and close examination of the Record, and after
extensive review of the relevant law, [he] is unable to identify an
issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for
relief on appeal. Counsel requests this Court to review the
record for possible error he may have overlooked.
Counsel has attached to the brief a letter he wrote to
defendant in compliance with Anders and Kinch advising defendant of
his inability to identify possible errors to assign on appeal and
of defendant's right to file his own arguments directly with the
Court. Defendant has not filed his own arguments and a reasonable
time for him do so has passed.
We have carefully reviewed the record and are unable to find
any basis to support a meaningful argument of error on appeal. The
judgments appealed from are affirmed.
Judges BRYANT and LEVINSON concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***