State v Coleman
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An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA01-615 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 5 February 2002 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. Mecklenburg County Nos. 00 CRS 116880 00 CRS 116881 RICHARD ASHLEY COLEMAN Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 30 November 2000 by Judge Beverly T. Beal in Mecklenburg County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 31 December 2001. Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Hilda Burnett-Baker, for the State. Public Defender Isabel Scott Day, by Assistant Public Defender Julie Ramseur Lewis, for defendant-appellant. EAGLES, Chief Judge. Defendant Richard Ashley Coleman was found guilty of larceny of an automobile. He was also found to be a habitual felon. He was sentenced to a minimum term of imprisonment of 120 months and a maximum term of 153 months. Defendant s counsel has filed a brief in which she states that [a]fter repeated and close examination of the record and transcript, review of the relevant statutory and case law, and further consultation with fellow counsel, she is unable to identify an issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for -2relief on appeal. She requests this Court to conduct a full examination of the record for possible prejudicial error or any justiciable issue overlooked by counsel. In accordance with 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), counsel submitted the brief to assist this Court with its review. She mailed a copy of the brief to defendant, together with copies of the transcript and record, and a letter advising defendant of his right to file his own written arguments. She also listed the assignments of error made in the record on appeal. Defendant has not filed any written arguments. Defendant s counsel fully complied with the requirements of Anders and Kinch. After carefully reviewing the record, we are unable to discern any possible prejudicial error or a justiciable issue. Accordingly, we hold that defendant received a fair trial free from prejudicial error. No error. Judges TIMMONS-GOODSON 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.
