Case ID: nc-app_8/html/0102-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Vaughn, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. HARVEY L. REVIS
    No. 7024SC224
    (Filed 6 May 1970)
    Appeal by defendant from Martin, J., November 1969 Session of YANCEY Superior Court.
    Defendant was charged in the bill of indictment with escape on 25 June 1969 while serving a sentence imposed upon a conviction of felonious breaking and entering. The defendant was found to be indigent and counsel was appointed. The defendant’s plea of guilty was accepted by the court and judgment was entered imposing an active sentence of six (6) months. In a letter from the defendant to his attorney, the defendant requested that his case be appealed. The trial court treated the letter as formal notice of appeal. The defendant’s present counsel was appointed to represent him on this appeal.
    
      Attorney General Robert Morgan by Staff Attorney Jacob L. Safron for the State.
    
    
      G. D. Bailey for defendant appellant.
    
   Vaughn, J.

The record upon appeal shows that the defendant was charged in a bill of indictment, proper in form. He was represented by counsel. After the defendant was questioned by the trial judge as to his understanding of the nature of the offense, his opportunity to confer with counsel and his knowledge of the offense charged and the punishment therefore under the statute, the defendant’s plea of guilty as charged was entered in open court. After making this inquiry of the defendant in open court, the trial judge found as a fact that the defendant’s plea was freely, understanding^ and voluntarily made, and that the plea was made without undue influence, compulsion or duress and without promise of leniency. The sentence imposed is considerably less than the maximum authorized by the statute. Defendant’s Assignments of Error 1 and 2 raise the sole question as to whether error appears on the face of the record proper. We have examined the record and find no error therein.

No error.

MoRRis and Pareer, JJ., concur.