State v. Dixon
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An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA No. COA15-318 Filed: 20 October 2015 New Hanover County, No. 14 CRS 54061 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. JACQUELINE MARIE DIXON Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 16 October 2014 by Judge W. Allen Cobb, Jr., in New Hanover County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 28 September 2015. Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Kimberly N. Callahan, for the State. Winifred H. Dillon for defendant-appellant. INMAN, Judge. On 16 October 2014, defendant pled guilty to one count of felony larceny and stipulated to prior convictions resulting in a prior record level II. In accordance with the parties’ plea arrangement, the trial court imposed a suspended prison sentence of six to seventeen months and placed defendant on thirty months of supervised probation. Defendant gave timely notice of appeal from the judgment. STATE V. DIXON Opinion of the Court Counsel appointed to represent defendant is 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 shows to the satisfaction of this Court that she 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 to do so. Defendant has not filed any written arguments on her own behalf with this Court, and a reasonable time for her to do so has expired. In accordance with Anders, we have fully examined the record to determine whether any issues of arguable merit appear therefrom. We have been unable to find any possible prejudicial error and conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. The trial court’s judgment is affirmed. AFFIRMED. Judges STROUD and DAVIS concur. Report per Rule 30(e). -2-
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.
