Case Name: STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. CHARLES LOYAL HUGHES
Court: North Carolina Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1970-05-27
Citations: 8 N.C. App. 334
Docket Number: No. 7023SC301
Parties: STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. CHARLES LOYAL HUGHES
Judges: Campbell and PARKER, JJ., concur.
Reporter: North Carolina Court of Appeals Reports
Volume: 8
Pages: 334–335

Head Matter:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. CHARLES LOYAL HUGHES
No. 7023SC301
(Filed 27 May 1970)
1. Criminal Law § 161— exception to signing of judgment
An exception to the judgment must fail if the judgment is within the statutory limits and is supported by the evidence, and there is no fatal defect appearing on the face of the record proper.
2. Robbery § 6— armed robbery — exception to judgment
Exception to signing of judgment entered upon defendant’s conviction of armed robbery is without merit where the indictment properly charged defendant with armed robbery, the evidence supports the judgment and the sentence is within the statutory limits.
Appeal by defendant from Tillery, J., February 1970 Criminal Session, Wilkes Superior Court.
Defendant was charged in a bill of indictment with the armed robbery of “Lowe’s Food Stores, Incorporated, Lowe’s Supermarket No. 3, located on Flighway #421 East in Wilkes County,” and that he did “feloniously take, steal and carry away” therefrom the sum of Fifteen Hundred Dollars ($1500.00). To this charge the defendant pled not guilty.
The case was tried to its conclusion and the jury returned a verdict of guilty as charged. Judgment was entered imposing a sentence of fifteen (15) to twenty (20) years. Counsel was appointed to perfect the defendant’s appeal to this Court.
Attorney General Robert Morgan by Assistant Attorney General Parks H. Icenhour for the State.
Max F. Ferree for defendant appellant.

Opinion:
VaughN, J.
The only exception and assignment of error brought forward upon this appeal is to the signing of the judgment. Counsel for defendant candidly admits that he has carefully examined the record and is unable to find prejudicial error therein, but asks this Court to review the record and to give to the defendant the benefit of any prejudicial error.
The appeal presents the case for review for error appearing on the face of the record. An exception to the judgment must fail if the judgment is within the statutory limits and is supported by the evidence, and there is no fatal defect appearing on the face of the record proper. 3 Strong, N. C. Index 2d, Criminal Law, § 161, p. 112.
The record herein contains a bill of indictment, proper in form, charging the defendant with armed robbery in violation of G.S. 14-87. There is ample evidence to support the judgment and the sentence is well within the statutory limits. We have examined the record and find no error.
No error.
Campbell and PARKER, JJ., concur.