where the trial court stated in open court that the defendant would be sentenced to six years imprisonment, but the signed judgment indicated a sentence of eight years imprisonment, the court of appeals remanded for imposition of the six-year sentence
How later courts described this case
- where the trial court stated in open court that the defendant would be sentenced to six years imprisonment, but the signed judgment indicated a sentence of eight years imprisonment, the court of appeals remanded for imposition of the six-year sentence
- holding a clerical error exists when a judgment does not reflect what was announced in open court
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
*23
MALLARD, Chief Judge.
Defendant assigns error to much of the evidence introduced by the State at the trial. We have examined the evidence, and defendant’s assignments of error thereto are overruled.
Defendant’s motion in arrest of judgment filed herein is denied. The bill of indictment in this case is sufficient and is distinguishable from the bill of indictment in the case of
State v. Able,
11 N.C. App. 141 , 180 S.E. 2d 333 (1971).
Defendant assigns as error the discrepancy between the pronouncement in open court that defendant be imprisoned for six years and the written judgment signed by the judge which indicated that he be imprisoned for eight years. We are unable to tell from the ambiguous state of the record the true character of the sentence. It is apparent that the written judgment contains a clerical error. For this error, the cause is remanded to the trial court to have the commitment corrected to conform to the sentence of six years as the record shows was actually pronounced in open court.
State v. Brown,
7 N.C. App. 372 , 172 S.E. 2d 99 (1970).
Remanded with instructions.
Judges Campbell and Hedrick concur.