State v. Arter, 1 CA-CR 15-0767

In Nov. 2013 Christopher Arter pleaded guilty to one count of forgery (class 4 felony) and was sentenced to four years’ probation with a condition to obey all laws.
In May 2014 Arter was arrested after police stopped him leaving a known drug house and discovered methamphetamine, pill bottles, small baggies, hydrocodone and carisoprodol pills, a syringe, and counterfeit money; Arter admitted ownership and intent to resell.
Arter’s probation officer filed a petition to revoke probation alleging multiple new felony offenses (possession of methamphetamine, possession of narcotics and dangerous drugs for sale, possession of drug paraphernalia, and related counts).
Arter was initially found incompetent but later restored to competency; a contested revocation hearing occurred in June 2015 where a detective testified to the stop, seizure, and Arter’s admissions.
The court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Arter violated probation and in Oct. 2015 revoked probation and imposed a mitigated prison term of 1.75 years with 588 days’ credit.
Arter appealed; counsel filed an Anders/Leon brief asserting no arguable appellate issue, Arter did not file a pro se supplement, and the Court reviewed the record for reversible error.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether sufficient evidence supported revocation of probation	State: police testimony and Arter’s admission establish probation violations by a preponderance of the evidence	Arter: (through Anders brief) no specific meritorious challenge identified to the sufficiency finding	Court: substantial evidence supported revocation; no reversible error
Whether proceedings complied with procedural/fundamental-error standards	State: proceedings and disposition complied with Arizona Rules and defendant had counsel and opportunity to speak	Arter: (no arguable claim raised) implied challenge to fairness/procedure not pursued	Court: no fundamental error; defendant present, represented, allowed to speak; legal sentence imposed

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedures for appointed counsel who asserts no meritorious appellate issues)
State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297 (1969) (Arizona counterpart regarding appointed appellate counsel duties)
State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530 (App. 1999) (appellate court’s obligation to search the record for reversible error)
State v. Gendron, 168 Ariz. 153 (1991) (standard of review for probation revocation: fundamental-error review)
State v. Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582 (1984) (counsel’s post-appeal obligations to inform defendant and potential petition for review)