holding a claim involving criminal sentencing was moot because the defendant had already served the sentence
How later courts described this case
- holding a claim involving criminal sentencing was moot because the defendant had already served the sentence
- officers were properly at defendant’s house to conduct “ ‘knock and talk’ ” after having received information from confidential informant that she had bought marijuana at house
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
STEELMAN, Judge
concurring.
I concur in the majority opinion, but write separately to emphasize the following:
I. Special Probation
It is clear that the trial court erred in imposing a term of special probation of four months in conjunction with a suspended sentence of six to eight months. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1351(a) provides that: “the total of all periods of confinement imposed as an incident of special probation, but not including an activated suspended sentence, may not exceed one-fourth the maximum sentence of imprisonment imposed for the offense . . . .” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1351(a) (2007). Thus, the maximum period of special probation that could have been imposed by the trial court was two months. The trial court further erred in the appellate entries in this case by denying release of defendant pending appeal. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1451(a) expressly provides: “When a defendant has given notice of appeal: . . . (4) Probation or special probation is stayed.” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1451(a)(4) (2007). Thus, by statute, the four-month term of special probation was automatically stayed when defendant gave notice of appeal. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1451(a)(4).
*517 While I seriously question the rationale of the cases holding that the above-cited errors are moot, I acknowledge that this Court is bound by those decisions. In the Matter of Appeal from Civil Penalty, 324 N.C. 373, 384 , 379 S.E.2d 30, 36 (1989).