State v. Mead
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
WYNN, Judge.
To disturb a sentence imposed by a trial court, a defendant must show an “abuse of discretion, procedural conduct prejudicial to defendant, circumstances which manifest inherent unfairness and injustice, or conduct which offends the public sense of fair play.”1 Here, Defendant contends the trial court’s decision to make his sentences consecutive was based upon the improper comments of the clerk of court. Because the clerk of court merely gave the trial court notice as to an omission in the details of the sentence imposed, we find no prejudicial error.
On 8 March 2006, Defendant…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. CummingsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2000
- State v. PopeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
- State v. AtkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1998
- State v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2000
- State v. DortonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. CarrouthersCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011
- State v. LawrenceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008
- State v. KeenerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010
- State v. MeadCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2007
- State v. OgburnCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009