Case ID: nc-app_7/html/0055-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Britt, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. BERNARD FOX
    No. 6918SC500
    (Filed 17 December 1969)
    Criminal Law § 146— conviction upon plea of gnilty — sufficiency of record
    In an appeal from a sentence imposed upon defendant’s plea of guilty to the felony of receiving stolen property, no error appears on the face of the record, where a review of the record shows that (1) defendant’s plea of guilty was freely, understandingly, and voluntarily made, (2) the indictment is in proper form, (3) the judgment is in proper form and is supported by the indictment and the plea, and (4) the sentence imposed is within the limits prescribed by statute.
    Appeal by defendant from Collier, J., at the 7 July 1969 Session of Guilford Superior Court.
    Defendant was charged in a bill of indictment, proper in form, with (1) breaking and entering a building occupied by Edmonds Plaza Drugs, Inc., (2) larceny of property valued at $205.00 and (3) receiving stolen property valued at $205.00 knowing the same to have been feloniously stolen.
    When the case was called for trial, defendant, personally and through his court-appointed attorney, tendered a plea of guilty to the felony charge of receiving stolen property alleged in the bill of indictment. Thereupon, the trial judge interrogated the defendant as to the voluntariness of his plea and defendant executed an affidavit in the form of eleven questions and answers to the effect that he fully understood the charges against him, that he was guilty of the charge to which he tendered a plea of guilty, that he understood that upon a plea of guilty to such charge he could be imprisoned for as much as ten years, that he was satisfied with the services of his attorney and that he freely, understandingly and voluntarily authorized and instructed his attorney to enter a plea of guilty to the felony charge of receiving stolen property. After adjudicating that the defendant’s plea of guilty as aforesaid was freely, understandingly and voluntarily made, and was made without undue influence, compulsion or duress, and without promise of leniency, the trial judge entered judgment that defendant be imprisoned for the term of not less than six nor more than ten years in the State’s prison.
    Within ten days after the foregoing judgment was entered, defendant gave notice of appeal to this Court and an attorney was appointed to perfect his appeal and represent him in this Court.
    
      
      Attorney General Robert Morgan and Assistant Attorney General Millard R. Rich, Jr., for the State.
    
    
      Charles W. Harden for defendant appellant.
    
   Britt, J.

In his brief defendant’s counsel presents no assignment of error but concedes that the only question before the court is: “Does error appear on the face of the record?”

In State v. Hopkins, 5 N.C. App. 282, 168 S.E. 2d 64, this Court said:

“It is well settled in this jurisdiction that an appeal from a sentence imposed upon defendant’s plea of guilty, voluntarily and understanding^ made, presents only the face of the record proper for review, and the judgment must be affirmed when the sentence is within the limits prescribed by statute and no fatal defect appears upon the face of the record proper. 3 Strong, N.C. Index 2d, Criminal Law, § 146, p. 88.”

We have carefully reviewed the record before us and find that defendant’s plea of guilty was freely, understandingly and voluntarily made; the indictment is in proper form; the judgment is in proper form and is supported by the indictment and the plea; and the sentence imposed is within the limits prescribed by statute. No prejudicial error appears on the record. State v. Alston, 6 N.C. App. 200, 169 S.E. 2d 520.

The judgment of the superior court is

Affirmed.

BROCK and VaughN, JJ., concur.