TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

State v. Washington

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. HOWARD WASHINGTON

State v. Washington, 276 S.E.2d 470 (N.C. Ct. App. 1981)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals of North Carolina · State Appellate Courts
Decided
April 7, 1981
Docket
No. 8010SC747
Judges
Arnold, Hill, Wells
Citations
276 S.E.2d 47051 N.C. App. 4581981 N.C. App. LEXIS 2250

Opinion of the Court — Arnold

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

ARNOLD, Judge.

Defendant contends the court erred in entering a civil judgment against him granting attorney’s fees to the State of North Carolina. We agree. G.S. 7A-455 provides that the court may enter a civil judgment against a convicted indigent for attorney’s fees and costs. Our courts have upheld the validity of such a judgment provided that the defendant is given notice of the hearing held in reference thereto and an opportunity to be heard. State v. Crews, 284 N.C. 427 , 201 S.E. 2d 840 (1974); State v. Stafford, 45 N.C. App. 297 , 262 S.E. 2d 695 (1980). Since the record before us contains nothing to indicate that a hearing was held in compliance with the above decisions, we vacate this civil judgment and remand for a hearing on proper notice to the defendant. By our decision we do not reach defendant’s argument as to the constitutionality of G.S. 7A-455.

Although we note that defendant now concedes on appeal that he can find no error in the court’s denial of his motion for nonsuit, we have carefully reviewed the record and also find no prejudicial error.

The record on appeal contains no less than 18 pages dealing with matters, among which are the court’s charge to the jury and defendant’s motion for appropriate relief, to which no assignment of error was made and which have no bearing on the issues raised by this appeal. This is in violation of North Carolina Rule of Appellate Procedure 9(b)(5). Counsel will be *460 taxed with the unnecessary printing costs in this case in accordance with Rule 9(b)(5). State v. Montgomery, 291 N.C. 91 , 229 S.E. 2d 572 (1976); State v. Monk, 291 N.C. 37 , 229 S.E. 2d 163 (1976); State v. Minshew, 33 N.C. App. 593 , 235 S.E. 2d 866 (1977).

In the criminal conviction we find no error.

The civil judgment is vacated and remanded.

Judges Wells and Hill concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1984: 11996: 119842026peak 1984 · 1

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 5

DepthCaseCited by
State v. Monk, 229 S.E.2d 163 (N.C. 1976) 80
State v. Montgomery, 229 S.E.2d 572 (N.C. 1976) 42
State v. Crews, 201 S.E.2d 840 (N.C. 1974) 25
State v. Stafford, 262 S.E.2d 695 (N.C. Ct. App. 1980) 8
State v. Minshew, 235 S.E.2d 866 (N.C. Ct. App. 1977) 2

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list