State v. Mejia
1 CA-CR 16-0657
| Ariz. Ct. App. | Apr 27, 2017Background
- In 2013 Jose Mariano Mejia pled guilty to aggravated assault and drug possession; sentenced to 9 months' imprisonment followed by 3 years' probation with mandated substance-abuse treatment.
- Mejia admitted methamphetamine use to his probation officer on three occasions (July 29, 2015; Aug. 26, 2015; Jan. 13, 2016) and signed written admissions three times.
- The probation officer filed a petition to revoke probation on April 7, 2016 for possession and use of illegal drugs.
- After a three-day hearing, the superior court revoked Mejia’s probation and imposed the presumptive 2.5-year prison term, with 215 days' presentence credit.
- Counsel filed an Anders/Leon brief finding no non-frivolous issues; Mejia did not file a pro se supplemental brief.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed the record for fundamental error and affirmed the revocation and sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to revoke probation | State: Mejia’s admissions establish violation by preponderance of evidence | Mejia: (implicitly) admissions insufficient without corroboration | Court: Admissions alone suffice; revocation supported by preponderance (Arizona R. Crim. P. 27.8(b)(3)) |
| Voluntariness of incriminating statements | State: statements were admissible and not challenged | Mejia: did not raise involuntariness at hearing or on appeal | Court: No voluntariness hearing was required; no evidence of involuntariness; no error |
| Fairness of the probation revocation proceeding | State: Mejia had counsel and was present at critical stages | Mejia: (implicitly) procedural error alleged via Anders brief but no specific claim | Court: Proceeding was fair; counsel present; no reversible error |
| Sentencing mitigators considered | State: Court considered mitigating factors before imposing presumptive term | Mejia: (implicitly) sentence excessive or mitigation inadequate | Court: Court properly considered mitigators and imposed presumptive sentence |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (framework for counsel filing a no-nonfrivolous-issues brief on appeal)
- State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297 (Ariz. 1969) (state case law regarding counsel's obligations when no arguable issues exist)
- State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530 (App. 1999) (procedures for appellate counsel's review under Anders)
- State v. Fassler, 103 Ariz. 511 (Ariz. 1968) (voluntariness of statements standard)
- State v. Lay, 26 Ariz. App. 64 (App. 1976) (confessions/admissions can alone support probation revocation)
- State v. Guerra, 161 Ariz. 289 (Ariz. 1989) (appellate standard: do not reweigh evidence)
- State v. Fontes, 195 Ariz. 229 (App. 1998) (viewing facts in light most favorable to upholding verdict)
- State v. Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582 (Ariz. 1984) (post-appeal obligations of appointed counsel and defendant's review options)