State v Wood
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An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA11-702 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 20 December 2011 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. Halifax County No. 08 CRS 55313 JOSEPH EARL WOOD Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 24 January 2011 by Judge J. Carlton Cole in Halifax County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 28 November 2011. Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Special Deputy General Donald R. Teeter, Sr., for the State. Attorney Anna S. Lucas for defendant. ELMORE, Judge. Joseph Earl Wood (defendant) appeals from a judgment revoking his probation and activating a sentence of twenty-five to thirty-nine months imprisonment. We dismiss. On 10 December 2008, defendant pled guilty to assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury. The trial court placed defendant on supervised probation for a period of thirtysix months. On 7 January 2011, defendant s probation officer -2filed a violation report charging defendant with violating four conditions of probation. Defendant appeared for a hearing on 27 January 2011 and admitted that he committed the violations. the conclusion concluded that of the hearing, defendant that willfully the and court without found lawful At and excuse committed the charged violations. Defendant s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), requesting this Court to conduct an examination of the record for prejudicial error and determine if any meritorious issue has been overlooked by counsel. a copy of defendant. a letter In dated this letter Counsel has attached to the brief 18 July she 2011 advised that she defendant mailed 1) of to her inability to identify any issue which would provide meaningful relief, 2) of her request to this Court to review the record for possible error overlooked by counsel, and 3) of his right to submit his possible. included appeal. own To a written arguments assist of trial copy Counsel the also this Court with defendant to that endeavor, transcript provided defendant and as the with soon counsel record the as on mailing address of this Court and the file number of his case in this Court. Counsel encouraged defendant to notify this Court -3immediately of his intention to file his own written arguments. Defendant has neither given this Court that notice, nor filed his own written arguments. We hold that trial counsel has complied with all of the procedural requirements imposed by Anders. We have reviewed the record error and we are meaningful appeal. unable to find any to support a We therefore conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous, and we dismiss it. Dismissed. Judges McGEE and 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.
