{
  "id": 4357806,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. RODNEY LAVON LINEBERGER",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Lineberger",
  "decision_date": "2012-06-05",
  "docket_number": "No. COA11-1098",
  "first_page": "241",
  "last_page": "243",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "221 N.C. App. 241"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Ct. App.",
    "id": 14983,
    "name": "North Carolina Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "526 S.E.2d 502",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2000,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "502"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "136 N.C. App. 831",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        11242379
      ],
      "year": 2000,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "832"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/136/0831-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "677 S.E.2d 518",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2009,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "527",
          "parenthetical": "alteration in original"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "197 N.C. App. 461",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        4167386
      ],
      "year": 2009,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "472",
          "parenthetical": "alteration in original"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/197/0461-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "331 S.E.2d 665",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1985,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "314 N.C. 99",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        4688200
      ],
      "year": 1985,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/314/0099-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "386 U.S. 738",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "U.S.",
      "case_ids": [
        6182629
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1967,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/386/0738-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "718 S.E.2d 174",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2011,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "180"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "722 S.E.2d 595",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2012,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "714 S.E.2d 754",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2011,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "762"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "693 S.E.2d 204",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 2010,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "206"
        },
        {
          "page": "206"
        },
        {
          "page": "206"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "204 N.C. App. 193",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        4176874
      ],
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 2010,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "194"
        },
        {
          "page": "194"
        },
        {
          "page": "194"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/204/0193-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 292,
    "char_count": 4255,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.737,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.2580867626475984e-08,
      "percentile": 0.33049436472937227
    },
    "sha256": "7494a522cd88d21ef152190a25dac41867c785e9b9fde3bb6b523ae5c353e887",
    "simhash": "1:9b0bc1f8f02a9cc1",
    "word_count": 706
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:36:11.101860+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges STROUD and ERVIN concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. RODNEY LAVON LINEBERGER"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "HUNTER, Robert C., Judge.\nOn 6 August 2007, defendant entered an Alford plea to two counts of taking indecent liberties with a child and one count of possession of a firearm by a felon. The charges were consolidated for judgment and the trial court sentenced defendant to 39 to 47 months imprisonment.\nOn 4 November 2010, the North Carolina Department of Correction wrote defendant a letter informing him that he was to appear for a satellite-based monitoring (\u201cSBM\u201d) determination hearing on 24 January 2011 in Forsyth County Superior Court. Thereafter, the trial court appointed counsel to represent defendant. On 29 April 2011, the trial court found defendant to be a recidivist and ordered him to enroll in a SBM program for the remainder of his natural life. Defendant gave oral notice of appeal in open court.\nFirst, defendant has not properly appealed this case. This Court has held that \u201coral notice pursuant to N.C.R. App. P. 4(a)(1) is insufficient to confer jurisdiction on this Court\u201d when a defendant appeals from a trial court\u2019s order requiring him to enroll in SBM. State v. Brooks, 204 N.C. App. 193, 194, 693 S.E.2d 204, 206 (2010). Instead, defendant must give written notice of appeal in accordance with N.C.R. App. P. 3(a) (2012). Brooks, 204 N.C. App. at 194, 693 S.E.2d at 206. Since defendant only gave oral notice of appeal, his appeal is not properly before this Court and is subject to dismissal.. Recognizing that he failed to provide proper notice of appeal, defendant filed a petition for writ of certiorari with this Court seeking review of the SBM order. A writ of certiorari may be issued to permit review of the judgments and orders of trial tribunals \u201cwhen the right to prosecute an appeal has been lost by failure to take timely action[.]\u201d N.C.R. App. P. 21(a)(1) (2012). This Court has, in the interest of justice, granted certiorari where the defendant failed to properly appeal pursuant to Rule 3(a). State v. Clark, _N.C. App. _, _, 714 S.E.2d 754, 762 (2011), disc. review denied, _N.C. _, 722 S.E.2d 595 (2012); State v. Stokes, _N.C. App. _, _, 718 S.E.2d 174, 180 (2011). In our discretion, we grant certiorari to hear defendant\u2019s appeal in this case. Second, counsel appointed to represent defendant on appeal has filed an Anders brief indicating he \u201chas been unable to identify any non-frivolous issue that could be raised in this appeal.\u201d He asks this Court to conduct its own review of the record for possible prejudicial error in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), and State v. Kinch, 314 N.C. 99, 331 S.E.2d 665 (1985). \u201cOur Court has held that SBM hearings and proceedings are not criminal actions, but are instead a \u2018civil regulatory scheme[.]\u2019 \u201d Brooks, 204 N.C. App. at 194, 693 S.E.2d at 206 (quoting State v. Bare, 197 N.C. App. 461, 472, 677 S.E.2d 518, 527 (2009) (alteration in original)). \u201c[T]his jurisdiction has not extended the procedures and protections afforded in Anders and Kinch to civil cases.\u201d In re Harrison, 136 N.C. App. 831, 832, 526 S.E.2d 502, 502 (2000). Nevertheless, in the exercise of our discretion pursuant to N.C. R. App. P. Rule 2 (2012), we have reviewed the record and found no error. Consequently, we affirm the trial court\u2019s SBM order.\nAffirmed.\nJudges STROUD and ERVIN concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "HUNTER, Robert C., Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Yvonne B. Ricci, for the State.",
      "Guy J. Loranger for defendant-appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. RODNEY LAVON LINEBERGER\nNo. COA11-1098\n(Filed 5 June 2012)\n1. Appeal and Error \u2014 satellite-based monitoring \u2014 oral notice of appeal insufficient \u2014 certiorari granted\nThe Court of Appeals granted certiorari to hear defendant\u2019s appeal from the trial court\u2019s order to enroll in satellite-based monitoring for the remainder of his life where defendant\u2019s oral notice of appeal was insufficient.\n2. Satellite-Based Monitoring \u2014 review of the record \u2014 no prejudicial error\nThe Court of Appeals\u2019 review of the record for possible prejudicial error in a satellite-based monitoring case in accordance with Anders and Kinch revealed no error.\nAppeal by defendant from order entered 29 April 2011 by Judge Anderson Cromer in Forsyth County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 25 April 2012.\nAttorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Yvonne B. Ricci, for the State.\nGuy J. Loranger for defendant-appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0241-01",
  "first_page_order": 251,
  "last_page_order": 253
}