State v. Brice
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An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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 Procedur e. NO. COA14-1173 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 17 March 2015 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. Catawba County Nos. 09 CRS 54530-32 SANDRA MESHELL BRICE Appeal by Defendant from judgment entered 30 April 2014 by Judge Yvonne Mims Evans in Superior Court, Catawba County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 2 March 2015. Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Kathleen N. Bolton, for the State. Appellate Defender Staples S. Hughes, by Assistant Appellate Defender Jason Christopher Yoder, for Defendant-Appellant. McGEE, Chief Judge. Sandra Meshell Brice (“Defendant”) was convicted in district court on two counts of assault on a government official or employee, and on one count each of being intoxicated and disruptive in public, assault on emergency personnel, and resisting a public officer on 25 July 2013. Defendant gave notice of appeal to superior court for a trial de novo. -2Defendant pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to assault on a government official or employee, assault on emergency personnel, and resisting a public officer on 30 April 2014. The trial court sentenced Defendant to seventy-five days in prison. Defendant appeals. Counsel appointed to represent Defendant has been unable to identify any issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief on appeal and asks that this Court conduct its own review of the record for possible prejudicial error. Counsel also 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 (1967), and State v. Kinch, 314 N.C. 99, 331 S.E.2d 665 (1985), by advising Defendant of her right to file written arguments with this Court and providing her with the documents necessary for her to do so. Defendant has not filed any written arguments on her own behalf with this Court and a reasonable time in which she could 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. the record. Affirmed. We have been unable to find any error in -3Judges STEPHENS 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.
