State v. Coronado, 1 CA-CR 16-0164

On May 23, 2015, during a domestic dispute in the family home, Coronado approached the victim while apparently intoxicated, produced two knives, and made threatening noises with a bicycle rim; the victim left and called police.
Coronado refused to leave the house for over three hours and was arrested after police intervention.
A grand jury indicted Coronado for aggravated assault (a dangerous domestic violence felony); the State alleged historical priors, that the offense occurred while he was released from confinement, and other aggravators.
At trial the jury acquitted on aggravated assault and on the lesser-included assault charge, but convicted on the lesser-included offense of disorderly conduct (class 6 felony).
The jury found several aggravating circumstances: possession/use of a dangerous instrument (two knives), domestic violence, and commission while on release; the trial court found four prior felony convictions.
Coronado was sentenced to the presumptive term of 3.75 years’ imprisonment (with 272 days’ credit). Counsel filed an Anders/Robbins brief, and Coronado did not file a pro se supplemental brief. The appellate court affirmed, finding no reversible error.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence for disorderly conduct conviction	State: Evidence that Coronado displayed two knives, threatened the victim, and intimidated children supported the lesser-included disorderly conduct verdict	Coronado: Not expressly argued on appeal (counsel filed Anders brief); implied challenge to verdict sufficiency	Affirmed — evidence was substantial and supported the conviction when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict
Procedural / appellate-review adequacy under Anders/Robbins	State: Appeals procedure followed; review for fundamental error appropriate	Coronado: No pro per supplemental brief filed; no preserved claim of error	Affirmed — counsel complied with Anders duties; appellate court reviewed entire record for reversible error and found none

Smith v. Robbins, 528 U.S. 259 (Anders brief standards for appellate counsel) (establishes counsel’s duty when finding appeal frivolous)
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (requirement that counsel who believes appeal frivolous must file brief identifying anything arguable and request permission to withdraw)
State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297 (App. 1969) (appellate review for reversible error on whole record)
State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530 (App. 1999) (procedure for appellate court to review record for fundamental error after Anders brief)
State v. Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582 (1984) (counsel’s post-appeal duties to inform defendant of options and potential petitions for review)
State v. Kiper, 181 Ariz. 62 (App. 1994) (standard of viewing facts in the light most favorable to sustaining a verdict)