
    STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ALBERT ALSTON
    No. 6918SC405
    (Filed 17 September 1969)
    1. Criminal Law § 161— appeal — exception to judgment
    The appeal itself is an exception to tbe judgment.
    3. Automobiles § 131— failing to stop after accident — plea of guilty — appeal
    In this appeal from sentence imposed upon defendant’s plea of guilty to a violation of G.S. 20-166, no error appears on the face of the record where the trial judge found that the plea of guilty was made freely, understandingly and voluntarily, the warrant upon which defendant was tried is in proper form, the judgment is in proper form and is supported by the warrant and plea, and the sentence imposed is not excessive.
    Appeal by defendant from Bowman, S.J., 14 April 1969 Session of Superior Court held in Greensboro Division of Guilford County.
    Defendant was tried on a warrant charging him with a violation of G.S. 20-166. This statute states in detail the duty of the operator of a motor vehicle to stop in the event of accident or collision.
    The defendant, an indigent represented by court-appointed counsel, in writing pleaded guilty as charged. The plea was found by the trial judge to have been made freely, understanding^ and voluntarily.
    From the sentence imposed, the defendant appealed to the Court of Appeals.
    
      Attorney General Robert Morgan, Assistant Attorney General William W. Melvin, and Staff Attorney T. Buie Costen for the State.
    
    
      Charles W. Harden for defendant appellant.
    
   MallaRD, C.J.

Defendant was represented in Superior Court by Mr. Kenneth M. Carrington. In defendant’s brief it is asserted that Mr. Carring-ton was subsequently appointed district court judge before filing a brief herein and that defendant’s present attorney was substituted.

On the record in this case no error is asserted. The appeal itself is treated as an exception to the judgment. 1 Strong, N.C. Index 2d, Appeal and Error, § 26, p. 152.

The plea of guilty was freely, understandingly and voluntarily made. The warrant is in proper form. The judgment is in proper form and is supported by the warrant and the plea. The sentence imposed is not excessive. No prejudicial error appears on this record.

Affirmed.

Morris and Hedrice, JJ., concur.  