State v. Sanders
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An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA14-532 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 21 October 2014 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. Gaston County Nos. 9 CRS 57022 10 CRS 2984, 8273 TRAVIS KENYEL SANDERS Appeal by defendant from judgments entered 9 January 2014, nunc pro tunc 22 July 2010, by Judge Jesse B. Caldwell, III, in Gaston County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 22 September 2014. Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Tiffany Y. Lucas, for the State. James N. Freeman, Jr., P.C., by James N. Freeman, Jr., for defendant-appellant. McCULLOUGH, Judge. On 21 July 2010, a jury found defendant guilty of one count each of sale of cocaine and delivery of cocaine, of two counts of possession status. of cocaine, The trial court and of attaining habitual felon consolidated his offenses into two judgments and sentenced him as an habitual felon to consecutive -2active prison terms of 100 to 129 months. On direct appeal, we remanded to the trial court for resentencing upon a single conviction for sale or delivery of cocaine conviction for possession of cocaine[.] and upon one State v. Sanders, 215 N.C. App. 393, 716 S.E.2d 88 (2011) (unpublished), cert. granted and remanded, 367 N.C. 207, __ S.E.2d __ (2013) (unpublished). On remand, the trial court again sentenced defendant to two consecutive terms of 100 to 129 months imprisonment. Defendant now appeals from these judgments. Defendant claims the trial court erred in failing to find two mitigating factors uncontroverted evidence however, a that aggravating and court at resentencing thereof. need mitigating within the presumptive range. not It factors enter when is based on his well-established, written imposing findings a of sentence State v. James, __ N.C. App. __, __, 738 S.E.2d 420, 426 (2013) (quoting State v. Allah, 168 N.C. App. 190, 197, 607 S.E.2d 311, 316 (2005)). As defendant was sentenced . . . in the presumptive range, the trial court did not err in failing to make findings as to mitigating factors. Allah, 168 N.C. App. at 197, 607 S.E.2d at 316. No error. Judges CALABRIA and GEER concur. -3Report 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.
