State v Glenn
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An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA05-1014 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 2 May 2006 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. Forsyth County No. 04 CRS 55492 04 CRS 15563 ANDERSON GLENN Appeal by defendant from a judgment entered 1 March 2005 by Judge Ronald E. Spivey in Forsyth County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 27 March 2006. Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General V. Lori Fuller, for the State. Jarvis John Edgerton, IV, for defendant. BRYANT, Judge. Defendant Anderson Glenn was charged with possession of cocaine with intent to sell or deliver and with habitual felon status. He was found guilty of possession of cocaine. After the jury returned its verdict, defendant pled guilty to habitual felon status. The trial court sentenced defendant within the presumptive range to a minimum term of 107 months and a maximum term of 138 months. The State presented evidence tending to show that on 4 May 2004, officers dispatched to of a the Winston-Salem residence to Police investigate Department a complaint were of -2trespassing. The person who answered the door permitted the officers to come inside the residence. defendant sitting on a couch. The officers observed After discovering an outstanding arrest warrant had been issued for defendant, the officers arrested him. During a search incident to the arrest, an officer found pieces of a substance subsequently identified as crack cocaine, total weight of 0.8 gram, and ninety dollars in cash in defendant s pocket. Defendant did not present any evidence. Counsel has shown 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, 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 arguments advising with this defendant Court necessary for him to do so. and of his right providing him to file with written documents Defendant has not filed any written arguments on his own behalf with this Court, and a reasonable time in which he could have done so has passed. In accordance with Anders, we must fully examine the record to determine whether any issues of arguable merit appear therefrom or whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. wholly frivolous. We conclude the appeal is In reaching this conclusion, we have conducted our own examination of the record for possible prejudicial error and have found none. No error. Chief Judge MARTIN and GEER 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.
