Case ID: nc-app_16/html/0647-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BRITT, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. WILLIE JAMES WALLACE alias WILLIE BRYANT
    No. 7228SC629
    (Filed 22 November 1972)
    1. Criminal Law § 161— exception to judgment — review of face of record
    Assignment of error based on an exception to entry of the judgment presents only the question of whether error appears on the face of the record.
    2. Criminal Law § 23— plea of guilty — no error on face of record
    No error appears on the face of the record in an appeal from judgment imposed upon defendant’s plea of guilty of voluntary manslaughter.
    On certiorari to review judgment of Thornburg, Judge, at the 27 March 1972 Session of Buncombe Superior Court.
    In a bill of indictment returned at the 8 October 1969 Session of Buncombe Superior Court, defendant was charged with first-degree murder. He appeared with his court appointed attorney at the 27 March 1972 session of the court and tendered a plea of guilty of voluntary manslaughter. After due inquiry the trial court adjudged that the plea was freely, understandingly, and voluntarily made, without undue influence, compulsion or duress, and without any promise of leniency, and accepted the tendered plea. From judgment sentencing him to prison for 15 years, with credit to be given for time spent in jail and the State Hospital between 28 September 1969 and 27 March 1972, defendant appealed.
    
      
      Attorney General Robert Morgan by Lester V. Chalmers, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, for the State.
    
    
      Ruben J. Dailey for defendant appellant.
    
   BRITT, Judge.

Defendant’s sole assignment of error is based on his exception to the entry of the judgment, therefore, the only question presented is whether error appears on the face of the record. State v. Martin, 10 N.C. App. 181, 178 S.E. 2d 32 (1970).

A careful review of the record reveals no error. The bill of indictment is proper in form; the defendant’s plea of guilty to a less degree of the offense charged in the indictment against him is authorized by statute; State v. Woody, 271 N.C. 544, 157 S.E. 2d 108 (1967) ; defendant was represented by an experienced attorney; the court, following a careful inquiry, determined that defendant’s guilty plea was freely, understanding^, and voluntarily entered; and the sentence imposed is well within the limits provided by statute; G.S. 14-18.

The judgment appealed from is

Affirmed.

Chief Judge Mallard and Judge Brock concur.