An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute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 Procedur e.

NO. COA14

- 393 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 7 October 2014

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

v. Durham County No. 13 CRS 57905 WILLIAM TARRELL COOK

On writ of certiorari to review judgment entered 19 September 2013 by Judge Paul C. Ridgeway in Durham County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 25 August 2014
.

Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Amy Kuns t ling Irene, for the Stat e. Kerri L. Sigler , for defendant

- appellant.

CALABRIA , Judge.

William Tarrell Cook (“defendant”) appeals a judgment
entered upon h is ple a of no contest to charges of assault on a female and inter fer ence with emergency communications. We affirm.
On 8 August 2013, an argument ensued between defendant and the mother of his children, Liane Chestnut (“Chestnut”). During- 2

-

the course of the altercation, defendant grabbed Chestnut by the neck and applied pressure, bit Chestnut’s finger, and kicked her
when she fell to the floor. When Chestnut attempted to call 911, defendant grabbed her phone and removed the battery. Defendant was subsequently arrested and charged with assault by strangulation, assault on a female, and interference with emergency communica tion. On 19 September 2013, defendant entered into a plea arrangement whereby he pled guilty to the charges of assault on a female and interference with emergency communication in exchange for dismissal of the charge of assault by strangulation. The tria l court consolidated the two charges into one judgment and sentenced defendant to 150 days i n the North Carolina Division of Adult Correction. That sentence was suspended , and defendant was placed on twelve months of

su pervised probation. Defendant filed a pro se notice of appeal on 25 September 2013.
A s an initial matter , we must address defendant’s notice of appeal
. D efen dant’s appellate counsel acknowledges that defendant did not give oral notice of appeal after entering his plea , but instead filed a written pro se notice of appeal in the- 3

-

trial court on 25 September 2013
. Pursuant to N.C.R. App. P. 4 (2013), a written notice of appeal

shall specify the party or parties taking the appeal; shall designate the judgment or order from which appeal is tak en and the court to which appeal is taken; and shall be signed by counsel of record for the party or parties taking the appeal, or by any such party not r epresented by counsel of record
. In addition, the appealing party must serv e copies of the notice

“ upon all adverse parties .” Id. In the instant case, defendant’s notice of appeal did not identify the court to which defendant appealed and did not include proof of service on the State. “[W]hen a defendant has not properly given notice of appeal, this Co urt is without jurisdiction to hear the appeal.” State v. McCoy , 171 N.C. App. 636, 638, 615 S.E.2d 319, 32 0 (2005). However, a writ of certiorari may be issued to permit review of the judgments and orders of trial tribunals “when the right to prosecute an appeal has been lost by failure to take timely action[.]” N.C. R. App. P. 21(a)(1) (2013)
. Defendant contends that although his notice of appeal does not wholly comply with the requirements of our appellate rules, it still demonstrates his timely intent to appeal from the judgments, and he seeks a belated appeal. In response, t he- 4

-

State argues the petition should be denied because defendant pled no contest and thus only had a limited right to appeal. However, even in cases where a def endant enters a plea of no contest and is convicted of a felony , he has a statutory right to appellate review of certain aspects of the resulting judgment. See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A

- 1444(a1) and (a2) (2013).
Moreover , this Court has the authority to issu e its writ of certiorari to permit belated appeals in support of a defendant’s statutory right to appeal. State v. Mungo , 213 N.C. App. 400, 403 , 713 S.E.2d 542, 54 4

- 4 5 (2011). Accordingly, while we find
that defendant ’s notice of appeal was insufficient to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court , we elect to exercise our discretion to permit appellate review pursuant to N.C.R. App. 21 and N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A

- 32(c) (2013). Defendant’s appellate counsel has been unable to identify any issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief on appeal and asks that this Court conduct its own review of the record for possible prejudicial error. Counsel has shown to the satisfaction of this Court that s he has complied with the requirements of An ders 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 his right to- 5

-

file written arguments with this Court and providing him with
the documen ts necessary for him to do so. Defendant has not filed any written arguments on his own behalf with this Court , and a reasonable time in which he could have done so has passed. In accordance with Anders , we have fully examined the record to determine wh ether any issues of arguable merit appear therefrom. We have been unable to find any possible prejudicial error and conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Therefore, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed. Affirmed. Judges GEER and McCULLOUGH conc ur. Report per Rule 30(e).