State v. Perkinson, 051920 NCCA, COA19-900

Docket Nº:COA19-900
Opinion Judge:YOUNG, JUDGE.
Party Name:STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. RUSSELL TAYLOR PERKINSON, Defendant.
Attorney:Attorney General Joshua H. Stein, by Assistant Attorney General Nicholas R. Sanders, for the State. Jason Christopher Yoder, for defendant-appellant.
Judge Panel:Judges BRYANT and BROOK concur.
Case Date:May 19, 2020
Court:Court of Appeals of North Carolina
 
FREE EXCERPT

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

v.

RUSSELL TAYLOR PERKINSON, Defendant.

No. COA19-900

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

May 19, 2020

Heard in the Court of Appeals 28 April 2020.

Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 2 July 2019 by Judge Leonard L. Wiggins in Granville County Superior Court. No. 19 CRS 277

Attorney General Joshua H. Stein, by Assistant Attorney General Nicholas R. Sanders, for the State.

Jason Christopher Yoder, for defendant-appellant.

YOUNG, JUDGE.

This appeal arises out of a contempt judgment. The trial court erred in failing to provide Defendant with notice and an opportunity to be heard in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 5A-14(b). Accordingly, we reverse the contempt judgment.

I. Factual and Procedural History

On 16 February 2018, a Walmart employee caught Russell Taylor Perkinson ("Defendant") stealing a flashlight. Prior to this occasion, Defendant was barred from the store's property due "to prior thefts and things that happened there." Defendant was charged with misdemeanor larceny, possession of stolen goods, and first-degree trespass. The District Court convicted Defendant of all the above offenses, and Defendant appealed to Superior Court where he ultimately pled guilty to misdemeanor larceny and first-degree trespass. In exchange, the State dismissed the possession of stolen goods charge.

The plea arrangement provided that Defendant would be sentenced to 180 days of imprisonment, to be suspended with a 30-day split. The arrangement also stated that "[u]ltimate sentencing shall be in the discretion of the court[.]"

The trial court sentenced Defendant to 120 days for misdemeanor larceny and a consecutive 60 days for first-degree trespass. Defendant made an unintelligible remark, and the trial court then held Defendant in direct criminal contempt and sentenced him to 30 additional days.

On 9 July 2019, Defendant filed two separate notices of appeal. Defendant filed a written notice of appeal identifying only the criminal judgments that had been entered against him in the file number 18 CRS 50277. Defendant also filed a second written notice of appeal specifically identifying the contempt judgment. On 19 July 2019, the trial court interpreted Defendant's second notice of appeal as a motion for appropriate relief to have his plea stricken but denied relief.

On 18 September 2019, Defendant filed with this Court a petition for writ of...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP