Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 6 November 2006 by
Judge Richard L. Doughton in Guilford County Superior Court. Heard
in the Court of Appeals 30 November 2007.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General
Jacqueline A. Tope, for the State.
Greene & Wilson, P.A., by Thomas Reston Wilson, for defendant-
appellant.
TYSON, Judge.
Leverne Jermaine Jordan (defendant) appeals from judgment
entered revoking his probation and activating his suspended
sentence for common law robbery pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-
87. We vacate the trial court's judgment.
I. Background
On 27 February 2003, defendant pled guilty to common law
robbery.
The trial court sentenced defendant to twelve to fifteen
months imprisonment, suspended the sentence and placed defendant on
probation for thirty months.
The trial court modified the original
judgment on 30 November 2004 and ordered defendant to attend a
residential program for thirty days and to submit to monthly drug
tests.
The trial court again entered an order modifying theoriginal judgment on 9 August 2005.
In the second modification of
the original order, defendant's probation term was extended for a
period of one year from 26 August 2005 to 26 August 2006.
On 11 May 2006, defendant's probation officer filed a
probation violation report alleging defendant had violated certain
terms of his probation
.
Defendant signed a written waiver of
counsel on 17 July 2006.
On 6 November 2006, the trial court held
a probation revocation hearing.
Defendant proceeded
pro se and
admitted he had wilfully violated his probation. The trial court
found that defendant willfully violated the terms of his probation,
revoked defendant's probation, and activated the suspended
sentence. Defendant appeals.
II. Issue
Defendant argues the trial court lacked subject matter
jurisdiction when it revoked his probation and activated his
suspended sentence.
III. Subject Matter Jurisdiction in Probation Revocation
Defendant contends his probationary period had expired on 26
August 2006 and on 6 November 2006 the trial court lacked subject
matter jurisdiction to revoke his probation pursuant to N.C. Gen.
Stat. § 15A-1344(f). We agree.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1344(f) (2005) provides:
The court may revoke probation after the
expiration of the period of probation if:
(1) Before the expiration of the period of
probation the State has filed a written motion
with the clerk indicating its intent to
conduct a revocation hearing; and
(2) The court finds that the State has made
reasonable effort to notify the probationer
and to conduct the hearing earlier.
In addressing the second of these statutory requirements, our
Supreme Court has stated, [t]he plain language of this statute
leaves no room for judicial construction[] as to the necessity of
a judicial finding, and there is no exception to this finding of
fact requirement based upon the strength of the evidence in the
record.
State v. Bryant, 361 N.C. 100, 103, 637 S.E.2d 532, 534-
35 (2006). If the trial court fails to make the requisite finding,
and the record lacks sufficient evidence to support such a finding,
the trial court lacks the subject matter jurisdiction to revoke a
defendant's probation.
Id. at 105, 637 S.E.2d at 536.
The State concedes that the record is devoid of any evidence
showing the trial court complied with the statutory guidelines set
forth in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1344(f)(2) to preserve subject
matter jurisdiction. The trial court did not possess jurisdiction
to enter its judgment revoking defendant's probation.
State v.
Camp, 299 N.C. 524, 263 S.E.2d 592 (1980). The State further
concedes
there is no evidence in the record to allow this Court to
remand the case to the trial court for the requisite findings of
fact.
Bryant, 361 N.C. at 104, 637 S.E.2d at 535. The trial
court's judgment revoking defendant's probation is vacated.
IV. Conclusion
The trial court did not possess subject matter jurisdiction to
enter its judgment revoking defendant's probation pursuant to N.C.
Gen. Stat. § 15A-1344(f)(2). No evidence in the record exists toremand for findings of fact. The trial court's judgment is
vacated.
Vacated.
Judges GEER and STEPHENS concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***