Filed: Mar. 20, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 20, 2012
Summary: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c); ARCAP 28(c); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24 MEMORANDUM DECISION THOMPSON, Presiding Judge. 1 This case comes to us as an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297 , 451 P.2d 878 (1969). Counsel for Justin Dale McDaniel (defendant) has advised us that, after searching the entire record, he has been u
Summary: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c); ARCAP 28(c); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24 MEMORANDUM DECISION THOMPSON, Presiding Judge. 1 This case comes to us as an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297 , 451 P.2d 878 (1969). Counsel for Justin Dale McDaniel (defendant) has advised us that, after searching the entire record, he has been un..
More
THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c); ARCAP 28(c); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24
MEMORANDUM DECISION
THOMPSON, Presiding Judge.
¶1 This case comes to us as an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297, 451 P.2d 878 (1969). Counsel for Justin Dale McDaniel (defendant) has advised us that, after searching the entire record, he has been unable to discover any arguable questions of law and has filed a brief requesting this court conduct an Anders review of the record. Defendant has been afforded an opportunity to file a supplemental brief in propia persona, and he has not done so.
¶2 Defendant was discovered removing a piece of air conditioning equipment from the fenced yard of a residential house on a dolly. The renter who discovered him told him to put it back and took a picture of defendant and defendant's vehicle. Defendant left the equipment and drove off. Using the photos, police located defendant who admitted trespassing with the intent of taking the machinery for scrap; defendant asserted he thought the house was abandoned. Defendant was charged with one count of burglary in the third degree, a class 4 felony. Defendant was convicted after a jury trial and he received a suspended sentence with two years of intensive supervised probation. One term of the probation was serving a month in county jail. Defendant timely appealed.
¶3 We have read and considered counsel's brief and have searched the entire record for reversible error. See Leon, 104 Ariz. at 300, 451 P.2d at 881. We find none. All of the proceedings were conducted in compliance with the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, and the sentence imposed was within the statutory limits. Pursuant to State v. Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582, 584-85, 684 P.2d 154, 156-57 (1984), defendant's counsel's obligations in this appeal are at an end.
¶4 We affirm the conviction and sentence.
MAURICE PORTLEY, Judge, JOHN C. GEMMILL, Judge, concurring.
