Case ID: nc-app_21/html/0343-01.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. SHELTON LUCAS and TERRY BARNES
    No. 747SC339
    (Filed 17 April 1974)
    Criminal Law § 161— exception to judgment — review of record
    An exception to the judment presents the face of the record proper for review, and, ordinarily, such review is limited to the questions of whether error of law appears on the face of the record and whether judgment is regular in form.
    
      Appeal by defendants from Webb, Judge, 22 October 1973 Session of Superior Court held in Nash. County.
    In separate indictments, proper in form, defendants were charged with armed robbery. They pleaded not guilty and a jury found them guilty as charged. As to defendant Barnes, the court entered judgment imposing prison sentence of 25 years with credit to be given for time spent in jail awaiting trial. As to defendant Lucas, the court entered judgment imposing prison sentence of 20 years with credit given for time spent in jail awaiting trial. Both defendants appealed.
    
      Attorney General Robert Morgan, by Deputy Attorney Getb-eral Jean A. Benoy, for the State.
    
    
      Roy C. Boddie for defendant appellant Shelton Lucas.
    
    
      Fields, Cooper & Henderson, by Roy A. Cooper, Jr., for defendant appellant Terry Barnes.
    
   BRITT, Judge.

The sole assignment of error presented by each defendant is to the entry of judgment against him.

An exception to the judgment presents the face of the record proper for review; and, ordinarily, such review is limited to the questions of whether error of law appears on the face of the record and whether the judgment is regular in form. State v. Shelly, 280 N.C. 300, 185 S.E. 2d 702 (1972); State v. Kirby, 276 N.C. 123, 171 S.E. 2d 416 (1970); State v. Strickland, 10 N.C. App. 540, 179 S.E. 2d 162 (1971).

We have examined the record proper and detect no error in law and the judgments are regular in form. Furthermore, we have reviewed the evidence and conclude that it fully supports the verdicts and the judgments, and the sentences imposed are within the limits prescribed by statute.

No error.

Judges Hedrick and Carson concur.