State v. Cook
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An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA No. COA17-610 Filed: 5 December 2017 Gaston County, No. 16 CRS 59251 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. DAVID LANCE COOK, Defendant. Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 3 January 2017 by Judge Yvonne M. Evans in Superior Court, Gaston County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 13 November 2017. Attorney General Joshua H. Stein, by Assistant Attorney General Carolyn McLain, for the State. Sean P. Vitrano for defendant-appellant. STROUD, Judge. On 3 January 2017, defendant entered a guilty plea to driving while impaired (DWI) and habitual impaired driving. He stipulated to prior convictions resulting in five prior record level (“PRL”) points and to committing his current offenses while on supervised probation, resulting in a sixth PRL point and a corresponding PRL III. See N.C.G.S. § 15A-1340.14(b)-(c) (2015). In accordance with the plea arrangement, STATE V. COOK Opinion of the Court the trial court arrested judgment on the DWI charge and sentenced defendant for habitual impaired driving to an active prison term of 17 to 30 months, consecutive to the sentence he was then serving. See N.C.G.S. §§ 20-138.5(b), 15A-1340.17(c), (e) (2015). Defendant filed timely notice of appeal. Counsel appointed to represent defendant is 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 shows 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 (1967), and State v. Kinch, 314 N.C. 99, 331 S.E.2d 665 (1985), by advising defendant of his right to file written arguments with this Court and providing him with the documents necessary to do so. Defendant has not filed any written arguments on his own behalf with this Court, and a reasonable time for him to do so has expired. In accordance with Anders, we have fully examined the record to determine whether 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. DISMISSED. Chief Judge McGEE and Judge DILLON concur. Report per Rule 30(e). -2-
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.
