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. Darius Jemal DANZY
Darius Jemal Danzy (“Defendant”) appeals from a judgment entered upon his plea of guilty to fleeing to elude arrest. We dismiss Defendant's appeal.
I. Background
Defendant entered an Alford plea to a misdemeanor charge of fleeing to elude arrest pursuant to a plea agreement in exchange for the State agreeing to dismiss a felony charge of felony fleeing to elude arrest. Defendant was sentenced to 45 days, with credit given for time served, the remaining sentence was suspended, and Defendant was placed on 6 months’ probation. Defendant filed a pro se written notice of appeal in the trial court 1 May 2023.
II. Anders Brief
Counsel appointed to represent Defendant on appeal “is unable to identify any issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief on appeal” and asks this Court to conduct its own review of the record for possible prejudicial error. Counsel has shown to the satisfaction of this Court that counsel 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 his right to file written arguments with this Court and providing to him the documents necessary to do so.
A defendant who has entered a plea of guilty or no contest to a felony or misdemeanor in superior court is entitled to appeal as a matter of right the issue of whether the sentence imposed:
(1) Results from an incorrect finding of the defendant's prior record level under G.S. 15A-1340.14 or the defendant's prior conviction level under G.S. 15A-1340.21;
(2) Contains a type of sentence disposition that is not authorized by G.S. 15A-1340.17 or G.S. 15A-1340.23 for the defendant's class of offense and prior record or conviction level; or
(3) Contains a term of imprisonment that is for a duration not authorized by G.S. 15A-1340.17 or G.S. 15A-1340.23 for the defendant's class of offense and prior record or conviction level.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1444(a2) (2023).
The State contends the record on appeal is complete and free of prejudicial errors. Our review of the record on appeal confirms Defendant's prior record level calculation was correct, and his sentence falls within the presumptive range for a record level I for a Class 1 misdemeanor. See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.17 (2023).
Defendant has filed a pro se brief with this Court. Based on our independent review of the record, his arguments have no merit. Defendant signed and acknowledged his transcript of his plea. Defendant stipulated to his prior record and was informed of the maximum punishment he was facing from his Alford plea. Defendant received a sentence in the presumptive range authorized for class 1 misdemeanors with a prior record level I. See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.23 (2023).
Defendant's pro se arguments appear to challenge the factual basis for his Alford plea and the trial court's acceptance of his guilty plea as knowing and voluntary. Defendant's arguments do not pertain to the issues from which Defendant has an appeal of right under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1444(a2) and are not cognizable by this Court on his direct appeal. “Defendant may seek relief by filing a motion for appropriate relief with the trial court.” State v. Baker, 263 N.C. App. 593, 822 S.E.2d 328, 2019 WL 190166, *1 (2019) (unpublished). “If a defendant who has pled guilty does not raise the specific issues enumerated in subsection (a2) and does not otherwise have a right to appeal, his appeal should be dismissed.” State v. Hamby, 129 N.C. App. 366, 369, 499 S.E.2d 195, 196 (1998) (citation omitted).
III. Conclusion
We have fully examined the record to determine whether any issues of arguable merit appear therefrom in accordance with Anders and Kinch. Anders, 386 U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493; Kinch, 314 N.C. 99, 331 S.E.2d 665. We discern no prejudicial errors and conclude the appeal is wholly frivolous. Defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so ordered.
DISMISSED.
Report per Rule 30(e).
PER CURIAM.
Panel consisting of Judges STROUD, TYSON, and WOOD.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. COA24-607
Decided: November 05, 2024
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)