STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. BENJAMIN ETHRIDGE (2025)

Defendant Benjamin Ethridge pleaded guilty to assault on a female. The trial court entered judgment consistent with his plea. Defendant noticed his appeal from that judgment and subsequently petitioned our court for a writ of certiorari to cure any defects in his notice of appeal. To the extent Defendant's notice of appeal, which he filed pro se is defective, we grant Defendant's petition.

Defendant's counsel filed a brief on appeal pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Kinch, 314 N.C. 99 (1985). Defense counsel requests that this court conduct an independent examination of the record for any prejudicial error.

Though counsel was unable to identify any discernable issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief on appeal, counsel “respectfully requests this [c]ourt to conduct a full examination of the record for any prejudicial error[.]” In accordance with Anders and Kinch, counsel also “advised [Defendant] of [his] right to file his own supplemental arguments” and provided Defendant with a copy of the brief, the trial transcript, and the record on appeal.

Pursuant to Anders and Kinch, we are tasked with independently examining the entire proceedings to determine whether Defendant's appeal is wholly frivolous. Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; see also Kinch, 314 N.C. at 102–03 (“[W]e [ ] review the legal points appearing in the record, transcript, and briefs, not for the purpose of determining their merits (if any) but to determine whether they are wholly frivolous.” (citation omitted)).

After conducting a full and independent examination of the record, including the potential issues presented by Defendant's counsel, we hold the record contains no meritorious issue which would entitle Defendant to relief.

AFFIRMED.

Report per Rule 30(e).

PER CURIAM.