{
  "id": 8524190,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. HENRY P. FARMER",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Farmer",
  "decision_date": "1983-02-15",
  "docket_number": "No. 8218SC660",
  "first_page": "779",
  "last_page": "781",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "60 N.C. App. 779"
    }
  ],
  "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": "N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 144.1",
      "category": "laws:leg_statute",
      "reporter": "N.C. Gen. Stat.",
      "year": 1981,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "(a)(9)"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-318.4",
      "category": "laws:leg_statute",
      "reporter": "N.C. Gen. Stat.",
      "year": 1981,
      "opinion_index": -1
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 266,
    "char_count": 4571,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.775,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.1382891332670006e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7667910368519555
    },
    "sha256": "aff87362fcad5487dce93b4f01a79909e29cd8417e87c1c16177268ab8ee8437",
    "simhash": "1:8b29e6ae36ce57b1",
    "word_count": 729
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:52:46.639047+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges Webb and Phillips concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. HENRY P. FARMER"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "BECTON, Judge.\nThe dispositive issue on this appeal is whether there was a sufficient evidentiary basis for the trial court\u2019s finding that defendant had prior convictions punishable by more than sixty (60) days imprisonment. The trial court used that finding as a factor in aggravation of defendant\u2019s sentence. We hold, for the following reasons, that there was not a proper evidentiary basis for that finding.\nG.S. \u00a7 15A-1340.4(e) provides, in pertinent part:\n(e) A prior conviction may be proved by stipulation of the parties or by the original or a certified copy of the court record of the prior conviction. The original or certified copy of the court record, bearing the same name as that by which the defendant is charged, shall be prima facie evidence that the defendant named therein is the same as the defendant before the court, and shall be prima facie evidence of the facts set out therein. No prior conviction which occurred while the defendant was indigent may be considered in sentencing unless the defendant was represented by counsel or waived counsel with respect to that prior conviction. [Emphasis added.]\nIn this case, a State\u2019s witness testified: \u201c[Defendant] was convicted for petty larceny, in West Virginia, where he served . . . approximately 18 days.\u201d Defense counsel, in response to the trial court\u2019s later inquiry, stated: \u201c[Defendant] was convicted of petty larceny in either Virginia, or West Virginia, and received a 30-day sentence\u201d and was convicted of driving under the influence of intoxicants. We are troubled by the suggestion in the record that neither the State, the trial court, nor defense counsel, knew for certain in which state defendant had been convicted or if defendant had prior convictions punishable by more than sixty (60) days imprisonment. More important, however, the trial court failed to make a finding concerning whether defendant was indigent at the prior proceedings, and if so, whether he was represented by counsel. In light of the clear mandate of G.S. \u00a7 15A-1340.4(e), such a finding was required before the prior conviction(s) could properly be considered. We therefore state the rule governing the use of prior convictions under G.S. \u00a7 1340.4, et seq.: A prior conviction is not automatically a factor to be used \u201cto aggravate\u201d or to enhance a defendant\u2019s sentence. A prior conviction which occurred while the defendant was indigent cannot be used unless defendant was represented by counsel or waived counsel in the earlier proceeding.\nAccordingly, we vacate the sentence imposed by the trial court and remand for proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.\nVacated and remanded.\nJudges Webb and Phillips concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "BECTON, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Edmisten, by Assistant Attorney General William B. Ray, for the State.",
      "Robert L. McClellan, Assistant Public Defender, for the defendant appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. HENRY P. FARMER\nNo. 8218SC660\n(Filed 15 February 1983)\nCriminal Law \u00a7 138\u2014 sentencing \u2014 aggravating factor \u2014 prior convictions \u2014 insufficient evidence \u2014 necessity for findings as to representation by counsel\nThe evidence did not support the trial court\u2019s finding as an aggravating factor in imposing sentence that defendant had prior convictions punishable by more than 60 days where neither the State, the trial court, nor defense counsel knew for certain in which state defendant had been convicted or if defendant\u2019s prior convictions were punishable by more than 60 days imprisonment. Furthermore, a prior conviction could not properly be considered as an aggravating circumstance without findings by the trial court as to whether defendant was indigent at the prior proceedings and, if so, whether defendant was represented by counsel. G.S. 15A-1340.4(e).\nAppeal by defendant from Davis, Judge. Judgment entered 15 February 1982 in Superior Court, Guilford County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 12 January 1983.\nDefendant pled guilty to, and was convicted of, one count of felonious child abuse, pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 14-318.4 (1981). That offense is a Class I felony, punishable by a presumptive term of two (2) years and a maximum term of five (5) years imprisonment. N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 15A-1340.4(f)(7) and N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 144.1(a)(9) (1981).\nAt the sentencing hearing, the trial court found one factor in mitigation and one factor in aggravation, and further found that the aggravating factor outweighed the mitigating factor. As a consequence, the five-year sentence was imposed. Defendant took exception to the finding of the factor in aggravation and appealed to this Court.\nAttorney General Edmisten, by Assistant Attorney General William B. Ray, for the State.\nRobert L. McClellan, Assistant Public Defender, for the defendant appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0779-01",
  "first_page_order": 811,
  "last_page_order": 813
}