State v Christian
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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 Procedure. NO. COA01-1011 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 16 July 2002 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. Forsyth County No. 00 CRS 52665 01 CRS 3848 DARWIN VERNELL CHRISTIAN Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 10 April 2001 by Judge Howard R. Greeson, Jr. in Forsyth County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 24 June 2002. Attorney General Roy A. Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General, Hilda Burnett-Baker, for the State. Rebekah L. Randolph for defendant-appellant. TIMMONS-GOODSON, Judge. On 27 February 2001, a jury found defendant guilty of attempted armed robbery. Defendant subsequently pled no contest to attaining habitual felon status pursuant to a plea agreement. After finding one mitigating factor and no aggravating factor, the trial court found the factors in mitigation outweighed the factors in aggravation. The trial court sentenced defendant to 120 to 153 months imprisonment, which is within the mitigating range of a Class C felony with a prior record level of VI. Defendant appeals the underlying attempted armed robbery conviction. Defendant s counsel states that she is unable to find errors -2allowing appeal, and asks this Court to review the record for possible prejudicial error. Counsel has shown to the satisfaction of this Court that he has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493, reh g denied, 388 U.S. 924, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1377 (1967), and State v. Kinch, 314 N.C. 99, 331 S.E.2d 665 (1985), by arguments advising with this defendant Court necessary for him to do so. and of his right providing him to file with written documents 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 must fully examine the record to determine whether any issues of arguable merit appear therefrom or whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. wholly frivolous. We conclude the appeal is In reaching this conclusion, we have conducted our own examination of the record for possible prejudicial error and have found none. We hold defendant had a fair trial, free from prejudicial error. No error. Chief Judge EAGLES and Judge MCCULLOUGH concur. Report per Rule 30(e).
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
