State v. Espinoza
1 CA-CR 13-0850
Ariz. Ct. App.Jan 29, 2015Background
- On January 18, 2013 Mesa police stopped a car with a smashed windshield; driver and passenger present.
- The passenger authorized a search; Espinoza told officers a gun was in a case on the floorboard behind him.
- Officers found a gun case containing a shotgun, a backpack with items tied to Espinoza, and a nearby knife.
- The State charged Espinoza with two counts of misconduct involving weapons as a prohibited possessor (shotgun and knife); jury convicted on the shotgun count only.
- Espinoza admitted he was on community supervision and had prior felony convictions; court found him a category three repetitive offender and sentenced him to the presumptive 10-year term with credit for 293 days.
- Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief; the court reviewed the record, found no fundamental error, corrected a clerical sentencing minute entry, and affirmed as corrected.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to convict for shotgun possession | State: evidence (admission re: gun location, shotgun in case with Espinoza’s backpack) supports conviction | Espinoza (via Anders): no nonfrivolous challenge preserved; no persuasive claim of insufficiency raised | Court: Evidence substantial; conviction supported |
| Jury and trial procedure adequacy | State: jury properly constituted and instructed; trial fair | Espinoza: no viable claim; counsel raised no arguable issues | Court: No reversible error; trial procedures proper |
| Sentencing calculation and record accuracy | State: sentence within statutory range given priors | Espinoza: no preserved claim other than record correction | Court: Sentence lawful; clerical error in minute entry corrected (cause number) |
| Right to counsel and appellate procedure (Anders compliance) | State: counsel complied with Anders/Leon; defendant given chance to file pro se brief | Espinoza: did not file supplemental brief | Court: Anders procedure satisfied; counsel’s obligations ended except to inform client of options |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (procedural standard for counsel filing brief asserting no nonfrivolous issues on appeal)
- Leon, 104 Ariz. 297, 451 P.2d 878 (state-level guidance for Anders-type review)
- Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582, 684 P.2d 154 (counsel’s post-appeal duties and defendant’s petition-for-review rights)
- Guerra, 161 Ariz. 289, 778 P.2d 1185 (standard for viewing facts in support of jury verdict)