State v. Hobbs, 1 CA-CR 16-0573

Phoenix officer stopped a vehicle for speeding and lane drifting; driver identified as Marlon Hobbs and showed signs of impairment; BAC tested at .218.
Hobbs was convicted by an eight-member jury of two counts of aggravated driving while under the influence (A.R.S. § 28-1381 variants and § 28-1383) with an aggravator that offenses occurred while he was on release for a pending felony.
Trial court found two historical felony priors and sentenced Hobbs to concurrent 12-year terms (10-year presumptive plus 2 years for the on-release aggravator), and awarded 523 days' presentence credit.
Hobbs intermittently waived counsel, later sought to represent himself, then reappointed counsel; he filed a post-trial Rule 8-related motion claiming coercive waiver of presence for excluded pretrial time.
Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief concluding no non-frivolous issues; Hobbs did not file a supplemental brief; the court reviewed the record for fundamental error and affirmed as modified.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence to convict	State: evidence (officer observations, BAC) supports convictions	Hobbs argued no viable challenge raised on appeal	Court: evidence (direct and circumstantial) sufficient; convictions affirmed
Waiver of defendant's presence / Rule 8 exclusion	State: court may rely on counsel's waiver of defendant's presence	Hobbs: absence at pretrial conference and alleged coercion rendered Rule 8 exclusion improper	Court: counsel's waiver is binding; Hobbs failed to show prejudice; motion denied
Need for voluntariness hearing on statements	State: no indicia in record requiring voluntariness hearing	Hobbs: sought to challenge voluntariness	Court: no record-based question about voluntariness; hearing not required
Sentencing / judgment entry error (statutory citation for count two)	State: sentences appropriate including on-release enhancement	Hobbs: challenged aspects via appeal (no-specific preserved issues)	Court: affirmed sentence but corrected judgment to reflect that count two was convicted under A.R.S. § 28-1381(A)(2), not (A)(1)

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (framework for counsel’s duties when filing a brief asserting no non-frivolous issues)
Smith v. Robbins, 528 U.S. 259 (U.S. 2000) (procedures when counsel concludes appeal is frivolous under Anders)
State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297 (Ariz. 1969) (appellate review when counsel files a Leon/Anders brief)
State v. Rose, 231 Ariz. 500 (Ariz. 2013) (court may rely on counsel’s waiver of defendant’s presence)
State v. Canion, 199 Ariz. 227 (Ariz. App. 2000) (discussing waiver of presence implications)
State v. Dann, 205 Ariz. 557 (Ariz. 2003) (prejudice requirement for Rule 8/time-exclusion challenges)
State v. Smith, 114 Ariz. 415 (Ariz. 1977) (voluntariness hearing standards)
State v. Finn, 111 Ariz. 271 (Ariz. 1974) (voluntariness hearing principles)
State v. Payne, 233 Ariz. 484 (Ariz. 2013) (viewing facts in the light most favorable to sustaining a jury verdict)
State v. Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582 (Ariz. 1984) (counsel’s post-appeal obligations following an Anders brief)