State v. Strickland
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. NO. COA13-484 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 15 October 2013 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. Robeson County Nos. 10 CRS 55964, 55960; 11 CRS 827 LEONARD EARL STRICKLAND Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 30 May 2012 by Judge Richard D. Boner in Robeson County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 14 October 2013. Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Lauren Tally Earnhardt, for the State. Bryan Gates, for defendant-appellant. CALABRIA, Judge. Leonard Earl Strickland ( defendant ) appeals from a judgment entered upon jury verdicts finding him guilty of three counts of failing to comply with the sex offender registration laws. We remand for a new sentencing hearing. Defendant was indicted for three counts comply with the sex offender registration law. of failing to Specifically, -2defendant failed failed to to comply give with notice the sex of a change offender of address registration and law by failing to return a verification notice. On 30 May 2012, in Robeson returned County Superior Court, the jury finding defendant guilty of the offenses. a verdict During sentencing, the State provided a copy of defendant s prior record level worksheet. Defendant s prior convictions included a 22 October 2007 conviction in Florida for a Sexual Offender Violation that was categorized as a Class F felony. Defendant stipulated to the convictions shown on the prior record level worksheet, and the trial court found, based upon stipulations, that defendant was a prior record level V offender. The trial court sentenced defendant to a minimum of 28 to a maximum of 34 months in the North Carolina Division of Adult Correction. Defendant appeals. Defendant s sole argument on appeal is that the trial court erred in sentencing him as a level V offender since the State did not offer any evidence to prove the proper classification of the Florida 1340.14. conviction pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A- We agree, and the State concedes that it did not present evidence to show that defendant s prior conviction in Florida was equivalent. substantially similar to the North Carolina -3Section 15A-1340.14 of the General Statutes addresses the classification of out-of-state convictions and provides: Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, a conviction occurring in a jurisdiction other than North Carolina is classified as a Class I felony if the jurisdiction in which the offense occurred classifies the offense as a felony . . . . If the State proves by the preponderance of the evidence that an offense classified as either a misdemeanor or a felony in the other jurisdiction is substantially similar to an offense in North Carolina that is classified as a Class I felony or higher, the conviction is treated as that class of felony for assigning prior record level points. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.14(e) (2011). This Court has found that the trial court errs where sentencing is based on a prior out-of-state conviction that has not been proved substantially similar to the North Carolina equivalent. to be State v. Morgan, 164 N.C. App. 298, 309, 595 S.E.2d 804, 812 (2004). [T]he question of whether a conviction under an out-of-state statute is substantially similar to an offense under North Carolina statutes is a question of law to be resolved by the trial court. State v. Hanton, 175 N.C. App. 250, 255, 623 S.E.2d 600, 604 (2006). In this case, the State failed to present any evidence, and the trial court did not find that the Florida offense was -4substantially similar to the North Carolina offense so as to support the worksheet. classification listed on the prior record level Although defendant stipulated to the existence of the Florida conviction, a stipulation regarding out-of-state convictions is insufficient, absent a determination of substantial similarity by the trial court, to support the trial court s prior record determination. State v. Chappelle, 193 N.C. App. 313, 333, 667 S.E.2d 327, 339 (2008) (citing State v. Palmateer, 179 N.C. App. 579, 581-82, 634 S.E.2d 592, 593-94 (2006)). Thus, the trial court erred in sentencing defendant as a prior record level V offender and we remand for resentencing. See State v. Moore, 188 N.C. App. 416, 426, 656 S.E.2d 287, 294 (2008) (remanded for resentencing where defendant stipulated to prior record level, but the State failed to present evidence that Ohio offenses were substantially similar to North Carolina offenses). Remanded for new sentencing hearing. Judges STEELMAN and STROUD concur. Report per Rule 30(e).
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
