STATE v. WARD (2025)

Defendant Larry Martin Ward, Jr., appeals from the trial court's judgments entered upon his plea of guilty to one count of possession of a firearm by a felon and upon a jury's verdicts finding him guilty of one count of trafficking heroin and one count of possession of heroin. Counsel for Defendant filed an Anders brief on appeal. After careful review, we conclude that Defendant received a fair trial, free from error or prejudicial error.

Background

On 18 November 2019, a Hoke County grand jury indicted Defendant for one count each of possession of a firearm by a felon, trafficking 28 grams or more of heroin, and possession of 28 grams or more of heroin. Defendant entered into a plea agreement with the State on 19 April 2021, pursuant to which he agreed to plead guilty to the charge of possession of a firearm by a felon with sentencing to be held after a jury trial on the remaining charges. On 21 April 2021, the jury returned verdicts finding Defendant guilty of trafficking heroin and possession of heroin.

That same day, the trial court entered judgments against Defendant. The court consolidated his convictions for trafficking heroin and possession of heroin, sentenced him to a term of 225 to 282 months’ imprisonment in the custody of the North Carolina Division of Adult Correction, and imposed a $500,000 fine. The court also entered judgment against Defendant in accordance with the plea agreement regarding possession of a firearm by a felon, sentencing him to a concurrent term of 17 to 30 months’ imprisonment.

On 25 January 2023, Defendant filed a petition for writ of certiorari, seeking review of the judgments, which this Court allowed on 2 March 2023.

Anders Review

On appeal, Defendant's counsel filed a brief pursuant to 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). Counsel has been “unable to identify any discernible issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief on appeal.” Hence, counsel has requested “this Court to conduct a full examination of the record for any prejudicial error and determine if any issue has been overlooked.” Counsel has shown to the satisfaction of this Court that he has complied with the requirements of Anders and State v. Kinch, 314 N.C. 99, 331 S.E.2d 665 (1985), by advising Defendant of his right to file his own written arguments with this Court and providing him with the documents necessary to do so.

Defendant has not filed any written arguments on his own behalf with this Court, and a reasonable time in which he could have done so has passed. In his Anders brief, Defendant's counsel raised two potential issues for our consideration, neither of which have merit, based on our careful review of the record. Defendant is thus not entitled to relief on these bases.

“Under our review pursuant to Anders and Kinch, we must determine from a full examination of all the proceedings whether the appeal is wholly frivolous.” State v. Frink, 177 N.C. App. 144, 145, 627 S.E.2d 472, 473 (2006) (cleaned up). As required by Anders and Kinch, we have conducted a full examination of the record for any issue with arguable merit. We have been unable to find any error, and we conclude that this appeal presents no issue that might entitle Defendant to relief.

Conclusion

Accordingly, we conclude that Defendant received a fair trial, free from error.

NO ERROR.

Report per Rule 30(e).

PER CURIAM.

Panel consisting of Judges TYSON, ZACHARY, and FLOOD.