State v. Dodgen
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An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA12-724 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 4 December 2012 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. Cleveland County No. 11 CRS 2598 ZANE CHRISTOPHER DODGEN Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 1 September 2011 by Judge James W. Morgan in Cleveland County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 26 November 2012. Roy Cooper, Attorney General, by Rajeev Assistant Attorney General, for the State. K. Premakumar, Bryan Gates for defendant-appellant. MARTIN, Chief Judge. Defendant Zane Christopher Dodgen appeals from the judgment entered upon revocation of his probation and activation of his suspended sentence. On 8 July We affirm. 2010, defendant pled guilty strangulation and resisting a public officer. sentenced defendant to six to eight to assault by The trial court months imprisonment, suspended the sentence, and imposed supervised probation for a -2term of twenty-four months. Defendant s probation officer filed a violation report on 13 July 2011 alleging that defendant had violated the condition of his probation that he commit no criminal offense. On 14 July 2011, Judge Forrest D. Bridges held a pre-trial hearing at which defendant executed a written waiver of counsel form that was certified by Judge Bridges. Judge Morgan held a probation revocation hearing on 1 September 2011. Defendant appeared without counsel, admitted the violation alleged in the July 2011 violation report, and asked Judge Morgan to run any activated sentence concurrent with the active sentence he was then currently serving. willfully probation, violated The trial court found that defendant conditions activated his of suspended his probation, sentence, revoked his ordered the and sentence to run at the expiration of the sentence defendant was currently serving. Defendant appeals. Defendant contends the trial court erred by allowing him to proceed pro se without conducting an inquiry pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1242. A criminal probation We disagree. defendant revocation has hearing, counsel and proceed pro se. a right including to the counsel right during to a refuse State v. Evans, 153 N.C. App. 313, -3315, 569 S.E.2d 673, 674-75 (2002). However, the right to assistance of counsel may only be waived where the defendant s election to proceed pro se is clearly and unequivocally expressed and the trial court makes a thorough inquiry as to whether the voluntary. The trial defendant s waiver was knowing, intelligent and Id. at 315, 569 S.E.2d at 675 (citations omitted). court s inquiry is only satisfied when the court fulfills these statutory requirements: A defendant may be permitted at his election to proceed in the trial of his case without the assistance of counsel only after the trial judge makes thorough inquiry and is satisfied that the defendant: (1) Has been clearly advised of his right to the assistance of counsel, including his right to the assignment of counsel when he is so entitled; (2) Understands and appreciates consequences of this decision; and the (3) Comprehends the nature of the charges and proceedings and the range of permissible punishments. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1242 (2011). to proceed mandatory. pro se, the provisions Where a defendant requests of section 15A-1242 are State v. Debnam, 168 N.C. App. 707, 708, 608 S.E.2d 795, 796 (2005). In State v. Warren, 82 N.C. App. 84, 89, 345 S.E.2d 437, -4441 (1986), the defendant argued that the trial court erred by allowing hearing him to proceed because there pro is se no at his record probation that the revocation trial court informed him of the range of permissible punishment he could receive from the probation violations, [therefore] his waiver could not have S.E.2d at 439. been knowing and voluntary. Id. at 87, 345 The defendant signed a written waiver that was certified by the trial court. Id. at 87, 345 S.E.2d at 440. When the trial court asked the defendant if he had anything to say at the probation hearing, the defendant replied: [Defendant]: Yes, sir. I just I m already doing time and I d like to say that I m guilty naturally by being sentenced. In other words, I automatically revoked my probation, but ask if anyway possible, since this sentence is to be run consecutive - I lay myself on the mercy of the Court. Id. at 88, 345 S.E.2d at 440. statement suggests that We held that the defendant s [the] defendant did comprehend the nature of the charges and proceedings and at least the maximum possible punishment. Id. to infer from the Therefore, our Court was constrained written, signed waiver and the court s certification thereof, that the dictates of G.S. Sec. 15A-1242 were followed. [The d]efendant has simply failed to show that the waiver he executed was not knowing and voluntary. Id. -5In the present case, the following inquiry occurred at the July 2011 pre-trial hearing: THE COURT: Zane Christopher Dodgen. Mr. Dodgen, do you understand why you are here? MR. DODGEN: Yes, sir. THE COURT: You re charged with probation violation. It is alleged that you were placed on probation July of 2010 by Judge Williamson under a suspended sentence of six to eight months with a period of probation of 24 months. The allegations are that you were convicted of a subsequent offense of breaking and entering and larceny after breaking and entering which you were convicted of that in July of this year. You have a right to be represented by a lawyer. You can hire one, get the Court to appoint one or represent yourself; which do you want to do? MR. DODGEN: Your Honor, I d like to represent myself and ask that, if possible, my sentence be activated and run with the concurrent [12-15] I m doing now. THE COURT: All right, please swear him to the waiver. (THE DEFENDANT WAS DULY SWORN AND WAIVED HIS RIGHT TO A COURT-APPOINTED ATTORNEY.) THE COURT: Show that probable cause is found. Let the matter be set for a hearing at a later time. The defendant is going to represent himself. -6At the start of the probation revocation hearing, the following colloquy occurred: DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Mr. Dodgen, please stand up. Mr. Dodgen has already waived at a prior term of court. This is in file 11-CRS-2598 probation violation. He was writted [sic] in. I have a note that he wanted at a prior term of court to have his sentence activated but for some reason Judge Bridges didn t want to hear the matter. THE COURT: Is that still your request, sir? MR. DODGEN: Yes, sir. To have it run concurrent with my active sentence I m doing now. We conclude the court s discussion with defendant in open court was sufficient to satisfy the mandate of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1242. The trial court explained that defendant had the option to hire an attorney or have one appointed. the trial court made it clear that the Additionally, proceeding was a probation violation which could result in the activation of a six to eight month sentence. Further, there is no indication that defendant misunderstood the proceeding as defendant twice requested that any activated sentence be run concurrently with the sentence he was currently serving. Taken together, the court s inquiries were sufficient to ascertain whether defendant understood the consequences of proceeding without counsel. -7Accordingly, we hold the trial court did not err in allowing defendant to proceed pro se. Affirmed. Judges STROUD and HUNTER, JR. 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.
