State v. Hammonds ( 2015 )

An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute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.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA
No. COA14-1134
Filed: 5 May 2015
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Union County
v.
Nos. 80 CRS 2302, 3176
KENNETH DARRELL HAMMONDS
Appeal by defendant from order entered 22 May 2014 by Judge W. David Lee
in Union County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 17 April 2015.
Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Justin M.
Hampton, for the State.
Kimberly P. Hoppin, for defendant-appellant.
TYSON, Judge.
Kenneth Darrell Hammonds (“Defendant”) was convicted by a jury of first-
degree rape and kidnapping on 19 June 1980. The trial court sentenced Defendant
to life imprisonment for rape, and 25 to 35 years imprisonment for kidnapping.
Defendant appealed his conviction to the North Carolina Supreme Court, which found
no error. State v. Hammonds, 301 N.C. 713, 272 S.E.2d 856 (1981). Thereafter
Defendant filed a motion requesting DNA testing but the trial court found there was
no evidence available for testing. We affirm the trial court’s order.
I. Background
STATE V. HAMMONDS
Opinion of the Court
On 10 December 2009, Defendant filed a motion to locate and preserve
evidence and a motion for DNA testing. Defendant also filed an affidavit of actual
innocence. Counsel was appointed to represent Defendant and the trial court ordered
any physical evidence relating to Defendant’s case to be preserved and inventoried.
On 8 July 2011, counsel wrote Defendant and informed him that “there [was] no
record of what happened” to the evidence in his case.
On 30 January 2014, Defendant filed a “Motion for Resolution of DNA Testing”
in Union County Superior Court. On 19 February 2014, the trial court ordered that
the State “file a written response detailing efforts to locate and preserve physical
evidence[.]” On 20 March 2014, the State filed an answer stating no evidence was in
the custody of the Union County Sheriff’s Department pertaining to Defendant’s case.
A hearing was held on 5 May 2014. The trial court heard testimony from
Linda Broome, the evidence custodian at the Union County Sheriff’s Department, and
Lieutenant Tony Rushing, a supervisor who was responsible for destruction of
evidence. Both testified that they were unable to locate any evidence pertaining to
Defendant’s case.
The trial court concluded no biological evidence was available for testing in this
case, but ordered the Union County Sheriff’s Department to “not destroy and in fact
preserve any evidence that might hereafter be found . . . [and it] be reported
immediately to the Court[.]” Defendant gave notice of appeal in open court.
II. Anders v. California
-2-
STATE V. HAMMONDS
Opinion of the Court
Counsel appointed to represent Defendant has been unable to identify any
issue with sufficient merit to support a meaningful argument for relief on appeal and
asks that this Court conduct its own review of the record for possible prejudicial error.
Counsel has also shown to the satisfaction of this Court that she has complied with
the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), and
State v. Kinch, 314 N.C. 99, 331 S.E.2d 665 (1985), by advising Defendant of his right
to file written arguments with this Court and providing him with the documents
necessary to do so.
III. Conclusion
Defendant has not filed any written arguments on his own behalf with this
Court. A reasonable time in which he could have done so has passed. In accordance
with Anders, we have fully examined the record to determine whether any issues of
arguable merit appear therein. We have been unable to find any possible prejudicial
error and conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. The trial court’s order from
which Defendant appealed is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
Judges BRYANT and DIETZ concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
-3-