STATE v. OWENS (2026)

Defendant Brian Owens appeals from judgments entered upon a jury's verdict of guilty to various drug-related charges. Defense counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Kinch, 314 N.C. 99 (1985), explaining that she was “unable to identify any issue with sufficient merit to support an argument for relief on appeal” and asking this Court to conduct an independent review of the record to determine whether any non-frivolous error exists to support Defendant's appeal. We will conduct a review of the record, consistent with Anders and Kinch.

The record discloses that defense counsel complied with the requirements of Anders and Kinch by advising Defendant of his right to file his own arguments and providing him with defense counsel's brief, the trial transcript, the record on appeal, and the mailing address of this Court. Defendant has not filed any written arguments with this Court, and a reasonable time for him to do so has passed.

To fulfill her obligation to refer the Court to “anything in the record that might arguably support the appeal[,]” Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, defense counsel pointed this Court to the following: the sentences imposed, indictments and sufficiency of the evidence, lesser-included offenses of trafficking in 28 grams or more of fentanyl, a motion to suppress, and a potential clerical error.

In accordance with our duty under Anders, we have conducted a “full examination of all the proceedings[,]” including a “review [of] 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.” Kinch, 314 N.C. at 102-03. Upon our examination of all the proceedings, we conclude the appeal is wholly frivolous and dismiss the appeal. See id. at 106.

DISMISSED.

Report per Rule 30(e).

PER CURIAM.