State v Speas
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An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA01-822 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 5 March 2002 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. Forsyth County Nos. 93 CRS 13344 93 CRS 28086 JOHN THOMAS SPEAS, JR. On review by writ of certiorari from judgment entered 12 September 1996 by Judge William Z. Wood, Jr., in Forsyth County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 4 February 2002. Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General M. Lynne Weaver, for the State. J. Clark Fischer, for defendant appellant. TIMMONS-GOODSON, Judge. John Thomas Speas ("defendant") was convicted of possession of stolen property and larceny in September of 1993. The trial court subsequently suspended defendant's sentence and placed him on supervised probation for a period of three years. report was served upon defendant on 15 August A violation 1996. At a revocation hearing before Judge Wood on 12 September 1996, defense counsel admitted that defendant had failed to satisfy the monetary conditions of his probation, left his place of residence without notifying his probation officer, and had been convicted for -2possession of marijuana. Finding defendant in willful violation of the terms of his probation, Judge Wood entered judgment revoking probation and activating defendant s sentence. 2000, this Court allowed defendant s On 18 December petition for writ of certiorari in order to review the 12 September 1996 judgment. _____________________________________________________ Counsel appointed to represent defendant on appeal has filed an Anders brief indicating that he is unable to identify an issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief on appeal. record for He asks that this Court conduct its own review of the possible prejudicial error. Counsel has filed documentation with the Court showing 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 advising defendant of his right to file written arguments with the Court and providing him with a copy of the documents pertinent to his appeal. Defendant has filed no additional arguments of his own with this Court, and a reasonable time for him to have done so has passed. In accordance with Anders, we have fully examined the record to determine whether any issues of arguable merit appear therefrom and whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. We conclude the appeal is frivolous, and we therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court. Affirmed. Chief Judge EAGLES and Judge McCULLOUGH concur. -3Report 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.
