#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. MILTON HAROLD STOKES

No. 732SC111

(Filed 9 May 1973)

Appeal by defendant from Tillery, Judge, at the 11 September 1972 Session of Superior Court held in Beaufort County.

Defendant was charged in an indictment with (1) felonious breaking and entering; (2) felonious larceny; and (3) felonious receiving.

The evidence for the State tended to show the following: that on the night of 4 March 1972 at about 9:30 p.m., defendant and two other persons went to Talley Implement Company in Washington, N. C.; that defendant and one of the persons accompanying him cut the lock off the rear door of Talley Implement Company with bolt cutters; that defendant and this accomplice took three mini-bikes, two Hondas and a “Sensation” model, from the premises; that the mini-bikes were taken to defendant’s residence near Chocowinity, N. C., and hidden in a barn; that later defendant and another person rented a U-Haul-It Truck and transported two of the bikes to New York; that two of the bikes were recovered from New York and that the third mini-bike, the “Sensation” model, was recovered from a barn on the property where defendant lives.

Defendant’s evidence tended to show the following: that on 4 March 1972 defendant did not go to Talley Implement Company; that he did not break into or steal anything from Talley Implement Company; that he knows nothing about the stolen mini-bikes; that he did buy a “Sensation” model mini-bike for $30 and stored it in a barn near his house; that he did rent a U-Haul-It truck as an accommodation to a friend who was not old enough to rent one; that the purpose of renting the truck was to move his friend’s sister to a new residence; that he helped his friend pack the truck, and went on that same night to New York, leaving the truck in North Carolina.

The jury returned a verdict of guilty of felonious breaking and entering and of felonious larceny. Defendant was sentenced to two consecutive terms of 6-8 years.

Attorney General Morgan, by Assistant Attorney General Blackburn, for the State.

Thomas E. Archie for defendant.

*149BROCK, Judge.

We have examined defendant’s assignments of error and find them to be without merit. An examination of the record reveals no prejudicial error. Defendant was charged in an indictment, which was proper in form; he was represented by competent counsel; he was found guilty by a jury after a fair trial and adequate instructions by the trial court; and the sentences imposed are within the statutory limits.

We hold that defendant had a fair trial, free from prejudicial error.

No error.

Judges Morris and Parker concur.