Case Name: STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. THOMAS LOCKLEAR
Court: North Carolina Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1971-07-14
Citations: 12 N.C. App. 36
Docket Number: No. 7116SC381
Parties: STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. THOMAS LOCKLEAR
Judges: Judges Britt and Graham concur.
Reporter: North Carolina Court of Appeals Reports
Volume: 12
Pages: 36–37

Head Matter:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. THOMAS LOCKLEAR
No. 7116SC381
(Filed 14 July 1971)
Criminal Law § 155.1— dismissal of appeal — failure to docket case on appeal in apt time
Criminal appeal is subject to dismissal for failure of defendant to docket the case on appeal within the time prescribed by Rule 5 of the Court of Appeals Rules of Practice.
Appeal by defendant from Braswell, Jvdge, 31 August 1970 Criminal Session, Robeson County Superior Court.
Defendant was charged in a proper warrant with unlawfully and wilfully operating a motor vehicle upon a public highway of the State of North Carolina on or about the 21st day of June 1970 after and while his operator’s license had been permanently revoked. Defendant was convicted in district court and appealed to superior court. From a conviction in the superior court and a sentence of two years in the Robeson County jail, defendant appeals to this Court.
Attorney General Robert Morgan by Assistant Attorneys General William W. Melvin and T. Bwie Costen, for the State.
McLean, Stacy, Henry & McLean by William S. McLean for defendant appellant.

Opinion:
CAMPBELL, Judge.
The judgment in this case was entered on 4 September 1970. The case on appeal was not docketed in this Court until 21 April 1971 and no order extending the time for docketing appears in the record. Rule 5 of the Rules of Practice in the Court of Appeals allows 90 days to docket the case on appeal, provided that the trial judge may extend the time for an additional 60 days upon a showing of good cause. As this case was not docketed within either of the prescribed periods of time, the appeal is subject to dismissal for failure to comply with the Rules.
We have, nevertheless, examined the record and do not find prejudicial error.
Appeal dismissed.
Judges Britt and Graham concur.