Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
STATE of North Carolina v. Jimmy Dell OTT, Jr.
Defendant Jimmy Dell Ott, Jr., appeals from the judgment entered upon his guilty plea to larceny from a merchant by use of an emergency door, a Class H felony. See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-72.11(1) (2021). In exchange for Defendant's guilty plea, the State dismissed two additional, factually related charges of felony larceny and first-degree trespassing; all charges initially arose from the same 2021 incident at a Walmart in Laurinburg, North Carolina. Pursuant to the terms of the plea arrangement, the trial court sentenced Defendant, a Prior Record Level V offender, to an active, mitigated term of 10 to 21 months’ imprisonment and ordered him to pay $2,441.23 in restitution to Walmart. Defendant timely filed written notice of appeal from the judgment.
Counsel appointed to represent Defendant on appeal has been unable to identify any issue of sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief. Accordingly, counsel has filed a brief requesting that this Court conduct its own independent review of the record for possible prejudicial error. Counsel has also advised Defendant of his right to file his own written arguments with this Court, and provided him with the information and materials necessary to do so. Counsel has thus demonstrated, to the satisfaction of this Court, her compliance with the mandates 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).
Defendant has not filed any arguments with this Court, and a reasonable time for him to do so has expired.
In accordance with Anders and Kinch, we have carefully reviewed the record for any issue of arguable merit. Finding none, we conclude that this appeal is wholly frivolous; therefore, we affirm the trial court's judgment.
AFFIRMED.
Report per Rule 30(e).
PER CURIAM.
Panel consisting of: Judges TYSON, ZACHARY, and FLOOD.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. COA23-648
Decided: December 19, 2023
Court: Court of Appeals of North Carolina.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)