State of Arizona v. Donald William Gulley, 242 Ariz. 149

In 2012 Gulley pleaded guilty to one count of disorderly conduct (class 1 misdemeanor).
In 2013 a jury convicted Gulley of two additional counts of disorderly conduct (also class 1 misdemeanors).
At sentencing the trial court, relying on A.R.S. § 13–707(B), (re)classified each 2013 conviction as a class 6 felony and imposed concurrent enhanced 3.75-year prison terms.
Section 13–707(B) directs that a person who "stands convicted of any misdemeanor" and has prior convictions for the same misdemeanor within two years "shall be sentenced for the next higher class of offense."
Gulley appealed, arguing § 13–707(B) governs only sentencing (not reclassification), while the State argued a felony sentence under § 13–707(B) necessarily reclassifies the current conviction as a felony.
The Supreme Court adopted the interpretation in State v. Ceasar, holding § 13–707(B) authorizes only sentencing enhancements; it requires the current conviction to remain classified as a misdemeanor for the enhancement to apply. The Court vacated the felony classifications and remanded for resentencing within the range for first‑time class 6 felonies.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether A.R.S. § 13–707(B) requires a repeat class 1 misdemeanor conviction to be reclassified as a class 6 felony (not just impose a felony sentence)	State: A felony sentence under § 13–707(B) means the current conviction is (re)classified as a felony because classification follows the sentence imposed.	Gulley: § 13–707(B) addresses only sentencing enhancement; the phrase "stands convicted of any misdemeanor" requires the current conviction remain a misdemeanor for the statute to apply.	The Court held § 13–707(B) governs only sentencing enhancements; the current conviction must be classified as a misdemeanor for the enhancement to apply. Reclassification to class 6 felony was erroneous; vacate sentence and remand for resentencing within first‑time class 6 felony range.

State v. Gulley, 240 Ariz. 580 (App. 2016) (appellate decision addressing classification and sentencing under § 13–707(B))
State v. Ceasar, 241 Ariz. 66 (2016) (interpreting § 13–707(B) as authorizing sentencing enhancements only; current conviction must remain a misdemeanor)
State v. Smith, 219 Ariz. 132 (2008) (trial court commits fundamental error when improperly using a conviction to enhance a prison sentence)