State v. Curry, 1 CA-CV 23-0238

Dustin Parker Curry was convicted of two counts of misdemeanor assault after a backyard dispute with two neighbors, where he was alleged to have threatened them with what appeared to be a gun.
The victims heard Curry threaten to kill one of them, saw him point what they believed to be a gun, and thought they heard gunshots, but only BB or airsoft guns were found by police.
Curry underwent two competency evaluations prior to trial; both found him competent to stand trial despite some concerning behaviors.
Curry missed jury selection and part of the State's opening statement, but the court found his absence to be voluntary and proceeded in his absence.
Curry was ultimately sentenced to supervised probation with credited jail time and special mental health probation conditions. His counsel filed an Anders brief, finding no non-frivolous issues for appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was Curry competent to stand trial?	Not specifically raised on appeal	Disruptive/crisis behavior suggests not	Competent, no error in denying further eval
Was Curry's absence from trial voluntary?	State: He had notice, chose not to attend	Defendant: Could imply not voluntary	Voluntary absence; court acted properly
Did trial court follow required procedures?	State: All rules/procedures followed	Defendant: Not clearly challenged	Court complied with rules, no error
Were convictions/sentences legally valid?	State: Statutory sentences, fair trial	Defendant: No non-frivolous issue raised	Convictions and sentences affirmed

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (establishes procedure for withdrawing as counsel if no non-frivolous grounds for appeal)
Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988) (court must review record for arguable issues if counsel files Anders brief)
State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297 (1969) (Arizona adoption of Anders procedure)
State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530 (App. 1999) (explains appellate review obligations under Anders)