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

PORTLEY, Judge.

¶1 This is 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 Defendant Rafael Angel Jaramillo 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 us to conduct an Anders review of the record. Defendant was given an opportunity to file a supplemental brief and has not filed one.

FACTS1

¶2 Defendant and his girlfriend had an argument outside her apartment on May 27, 2007. Afterwards, she called the police and told them that Defendant was carrying a gun in a shoulder holster. The police found the Defendant near the apartment, but he was not carrying a gun. After searching the area, the police found a gun and a shoulder holster in a bush, and Defendant's fingerprints were subsequently found on the gun.

¶3 Defendant was indicted for misconduct involving a weapon.2 The jury convicted him as charged, and he was sentenced to 4.5 years in prison with 1,038 days of presentence incarceration credit.

¶4 We have jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to Article 6, Section 9, of the Arizona Constitution, and Arizona Revised Statutes ("A.R.S.") sections 12-120.21(A)(1) (2003), 13-4031, and -4033(A)(1) (2010).

DISCUSSION

¶5 We have read and considered counsel's brief, and have searched the entire record for reversible error. We find none. See Leon, 104 Ariz. at 300, 451 P.2d at 881. All of the proceedings were conducted in compliance with the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure. The record, as presented, reveals that Defendant was represented by counsel at all stages of the proceedings, and the sentence imposed was within the statutory limits.

CONCLUSION

¶6 After this decision has been filed, counsel's obligation to represent Defendant in this appeal has ended. Counsel need do no more than inform Defendant of the status of the appeal and Defendant's future options, unless counsel's review reveals an issue appropriate for submission to the Arizona Supreme Court by petition for review. See State v. Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582, 585, 684 P.2d 154, 157 (1984). Defendant can, if desired, file a motion for reconsideration or petition for review pursuant to the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure.

¶7 Accordingly, we affirm Defendant's conviction and sentence.

LAWRENCE F. WINTHROP and PATRICK IRVINE, Judges, Concurring.