#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. WILLIAM BALDWIN

No. 7122SC752

(Filed 15 December 1971)

Robbery § 4— sufficiency of evidence

The State’s evidence was sufficient for the jury in this armed robbery prosecution.

Appeal by defendant from Crissman, Judge, 24 May 1971 Session of Superior Court held in Iredell County.

Defendant was tried upon a bill of indictment, proper in form, charging him with the armed robbery of Larry and Lola Shives.

This case was consolidated for trial in the superior court with the case of State v. Larry Baldwin which is the subject of a separate appeal. (See opinion in easeno..7122SC751 by Judge Graham, filed this date.) No objection to the consolidation appears in this record.

The evidence for the State tended to show that.on 6 January 1971 defendant William Baldwin and his brother, Larry Baldwin, were transported from Charlotte to the place of business operated by Larry Shives and located east of Statesville on Highway 70. The defendant and his brother entered Shives’ place of business at about 8:40 p.m. One of the said Baldwins put a knife to Mr. Shives’ throat and threatened to kill him if he moved. Mr. Shives did move, and the other man struck him on the head, rendering him unconscious. Consciousness returned to Mr. Shives while one of the defendants was kicking him in the ribs. Mrs. Lola Shives, wife' of Larry Shives, was present and the defendant and his brother beat her about the head, face and breast. The defendants took about $3,900 from Mr. Shives and two pistols from the place of business.

Defendant offered evidence that tended to show that he was at some other place and could not and did not commit the alleged crime.

The defendant was found guilty of armed robbery. From a judgment of imprisonment, the defendant appealed to the Court of Appeals.

*233 Attorney General Morgan, and Assistant Attorney General Cole for the State.

Chamblee, Nash & Frank by T. Michael Lassiter for defendant appellant.

MALLARD, Chief Judge.

There was ample evidence for the jury to find that the defendant and his brother, on the date alleged, robbed and brutally assaulted Mr. Larry Shives and his wife with “the use and threatened use of firearms, and other dangerous weapons.7 This appears to be simply another instance of an indigent defendant appealing because the State will have to pay for it.

We have carefully examined the record, and no prejudicial error appears. The appeal is adjudged to be frivolous.

No error.

Judges Hedrick and Graham concur.