Return to nccourts.org
Return to the Opinions Page
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA07-356

NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS

Filed: 2 October 2007

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

         v.                        Stanly County
                                No. 06 CRS 53693
KELVIN DEON DUNLAP                         
                                    

    Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 30 November 2006 by Judge Christopher M. Collier in S tanly County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 24 September 2007.

    Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Special Deputy Attorney General Robert C. Montgomery, for the State.

    Stubbs, Cole, Breedlove, Prentis & Biggs, PLLC, by C. Scott Holmes, for defendant-appellant.

    BRYANT, Judge.

     On 16 October 2006, Kelvin Deon Dunlap (defendant) was indicted for assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury. On 30 November 2006, defendant pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury. In accordance with the terms of the plea agreement, defendant was sentenced to a term of thirty to forty-five months imprisonment. Defendant appeals.
    Counsel appointed to represent defendant has been unable to identify any issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief on appeal and asks that this Court conduct its own review of the record for possible prejudicial error. Counsel has also shown to the satisfaction of this Court that he hascomplied 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 in which he could have done so has passed. In accordance with Anders, we have fully examined the record to determine whether any issues of arguable merit appear therefrom. We have been unable to find any possible prejudicial error and conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous.
    No error.
    Judges WYNN and ELMORE concur.
    Report per Rule 30(e).

*** Converted from WordPerfect ***