State v Price

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An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA02-434 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 15 October 2002 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. Rutherford County No. 00 CRS 9291 DEMIEN PERCELL PRICE, Defendant. Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 4 June 2001 by Judge Loto G. Caviness in Rutherford County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 7 October 2002. Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Daniel P. O Brien, for the State. David W. Rogers for defendant-appellant. EAGLES, Chief Judge. Demien Price ( defendant ) pled guilty to the charge of robbery with a dangerous weapon. sentencing defendant imprisonment. to The trial court entered judgment fifty-one to seventy-one months Defendant appeals. 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 -2documentation 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 arguments of his own with this Court and a reasonable time for him to do so has passed. In accordance with Anders and Kinch, we have fully examined the record to determine whether any issues of arguable merit appear therein. We find no error and conclude that the appeal is frivolous. No error. Judges McCULLOUGH and HUDSON 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.