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An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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.
NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS
Filed: 20 November 2007
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
v. Pitt County
No. 07 CRS 356
ASHLEY NICOLE WIGGINS
Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 26 February 2007 by
Judge Clifton W. Everett, Jr., in Pitt County Superior Court.
Heard in the Court of Appeals 16 November 2007
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General J.
Philip Allen, for the State.
Appellate Defender Staples Hughes, by Assistant Appellate
Defender Kristen L. Todd, for defendant-appellant.
Ashley Nicole Wiggins (defendant) appeals from judgment
entered revoking her probation and activating her suspended
sentences for her conviction of selling cocaine pursuant to N.C.
Gen. Stat. § 90-95(A)(1). We affirm.
On 17 January 2006, defendant pled guilty in Bertie County
to the sale of cocaine
The trial court sentenced
defendant to ten to twelve months imprisonment, suspended the
sentence, placed defendant on supervised probation for eighteen
months, ordered her to pay restitution, and transferred her
probation to Pitt County.
On 11 January 2007,
defendant's probation officer filed aviolation report
alleging defendant violated four terms and
conditions of her probationary judgment: (1) not using or
possessing illegal drugs; (2) failure to meet with her probation
officer; (3) failure to pay restitution; and (4) failure to notify
her probation officer if she changed her home address.
At the probation violation hearing on 26 February 2007,
defendant admitted that the violations were true. The trial court
found defendant had willfully violated her probation and activated
her suspended sentence. Defendant appeals.
II. Anders Brief
Defendant's appellate counsel states that after careful review
of the record, she has been unable to find any non-frivolous issue
to be raised in this appeal. Counsel asks this Court to examine
the record for possible prejudicial error.
Counsel has shown to the satisfaction of this Court compliance
with the requirements of 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), by advising defendant of her right to file written
arguments with this Court and providing her with the necessary
documents. Defendant has not filed any written arguments with this
Court and a reasonable time in which she could have done so has
In accordance with Anders, we must fully examine the record to
determine whether any issues of arguable merit appear therein or
whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. We have conducted our own
examination of the record for possible prejudicial error and havefound none. We conclude this appeal is wholly frivolous.
Defendant has failed to file arguments with this court in
accordance with Anders
. 386 U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493
reasonable time for her to do so has passed. This appeal is wholly
frivolous. The trial court's judgment is affirmed.
Judges GEER and STEPHENS concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***