State v. Moore, 6926SC395
Decision Date | 19 November 1969 |
Docket Number | No. 6926SC395,6926SC395 |
Citation | 6 N.C.App. 596,170 S.E.2d 568 |
Parties | STATE of North Carolina v. Marshall MOORE. |
Court | North Carolina Court of Appeals |
Millard R. Rich, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Clark C. Totherow, Charlotte, for defendant appellant.
This case was submitted on briefs without oral argument and pursuant to Rule 10, Rules of Practice in the Court of Appeals of North Carolina.
The only purported assignment of error appearing in the record is as follows:
Defendant's counsel prepared and docketed the record on appeal which includes a narration of the evidence and the court's charge as well as the record proper. In his brief counsel states:
'* * * I have searched the Record proper and am unable to find any error in the Record proper that merits the court's consideration, whereby the defendant would be entitled to any relief by the court.' (emphasis added).
Technically speaking, the charge and the evidence are not a part of the record proper. Carruthers v. R.R., 218 N.C. 377, 11 S.E.2d 157. 1 Strong, N.C.Index, Appeal and Error, §§ 40, 41. The record proper in a criminal case consists of the bill of indictment or warrant, the plea on which the case is tried, the verdict and the judgment from which appeal is taken. State v. Stubbs, 265 N.C. 420, 144 S.E.2d 262. An appeal itself is an exception to the judgment which presents for review error appearing on the face of the record. State v. Ayscue, 240 N.C. 196, 81 S.E.2d 403; State v. Williams, 235 N.C. 429, 70 S.E.2d 1; State v. Hitchcock, 4 N.C.App. 676, 167 S.E.2d 545.
Even though the charge and evidence is included in the case on appeal, if error appears therein it has not been made the subject of an exception or assignment of error and is therefore not before us for consideration. Rule 21, Rules of Practice in the Court of Appeals of North Carolina; State v. Jones, 275 N.C. 432, 168 S.E.2d 380. We have, however, examined the record proper. The Superior Court had jurisdiction. The bill of indictment charges in proper form a criminal offense. The verdict and judgment are in proper form and the sentence imposed is within the limits fixed by statute. We agree with counsel that no error appears on the face of the record proper. State v. Williams, Supra; State v. Hitchcock, Supra.
Defendant's exception to having been tried with counsel appearing herein representing him, though not timely or in proper form, has been considered by us and found without merit.
The record indicates that at sometime before the trial the defendant was determined indigent and counsel was assigned by the court. The order finding defendant indigent and assigning counsel does not appear in the record and we have no way of knowing the date on which counsel was appointed. Before the jury was impaneled the defendant complained of his court appointed counsel and stated to the court outside the presence of the jury selected to try the case:
No motion was made by defendant or his counsel that counsel be permitted to withdraw or that he be discharged. The defendant did not suggest to the court that counsel was not professionally competent nor did he express a desire to represent himself. An expression by a defendant of an unfounded dissatisfaction with his court appointed counsel does not entitle him to the services of another court appointed attorney. People v. Terry, 224 Cal.App.2d 415, 36 Cal.Rptr. 722. It is well settled that an indigent ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Dickerson
...N.C. 97, 157 S.E.2d 606; State v. Elliott, 269 N.C. 683, 153 S.E.2d 330; State v. McNeil, 263 N.C. 260, 139 S.E.2d 667; State v. Moore, 6 N.C.App. 596, 170 S.E.2d 568; Campbell v. State of Maryland, 231 Md. 21, 188 A.2d 282; Brown v. United States, 105 U.S.App.D.C. 77, 264 F.2d 363. "(T)he ......
-
State v. Crabb, 7023SC375
... ... State v. Subbs, 265 N.C. 420, 144 S.E.2d 262; State v. Moore, 6 N.C.App. 596, 170 S.E.2d 568 ... In reviewing the face of the record it is noted that the judgment contains error. Defendant ... ...
-
State v. Scott, 7021SC172
...the motion, stating his doubt that defendant would be satisfied with any lawyer that the court might appoint. In State v. Moore, 6 N.C.App. 596, 170 S.E.2d 568 (1969), this Court, in an opinion by Graham, J., '* * * The defendant did not suggest to the court that counsel was not professiona......
-
State v. Ford
...whether error appears on the face of the record proper. State v. Roberts, 279 N.C. 500, 183 S.E.2d 647 (1971); State v. Moore, 6 N.C.App. 596, 170 S.E.2d 568 (1969). In State v. Tinsley, 279 N.C. 482, 183 S.E.2d 669 (1971), it is '* * * Ordinarily, in criminal cases the record proper consis......