State v. Ward
1 CA-CR 16-0066
| Ariz. Ct. App. | Mar 9, 2017Background
- In October 2013 Laura Riddle‑Strickland recruited S.F. and appellant Rakeim Ward to steal a hard drive (and methamphetamine) from D.F.; they mistakenly targeted the wrong apartment.
- S.F. and Ward forced entry into T.J.’s apartment; S.F. was armed and kept a gun on T.J. while Ward went to a back bedroom.
- T.J. retrieved his gun and shot S.F. multiple times; S.F. died at the scene.
- Ward fled (jumped from a window, discarded clothing) and was arrested the next day.
- The State charged Ward with first‑degree felony murder (count 1), attempt to commit armed robbery (count 2), and first‑degree burglary (count 3); a jury convicted him on all counts.
- The trial court sentenced Ward to concurrent terms: life with parole possible after 25 years (count 1), 7.5 years (count 2), and 10.5 years (count 3); 827 days’ presentence credit and $700 restitution were awarded.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Ward's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there are any arguable appellate issues warranting reversal | Record shows convictions and sentences were lawful; no reversible error | Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief stating no arguable issues; Ward filed no pro se brief | Court conducted Anders/Leon review and found no reversible error; affirmed |
| Validity of convictions for murder, attempted armed robbery, burglary | Evidence supported jury verdicts for all charges (participation in forcible entry and resulting death) | Challenged issues not raised on appeal; no specific defense brief presented | Convictions affirmed |
| Sentencing legality and credit/restitution orders | Sentences within statutory limits; credit and restitution properly imposed | No argument presented contesting sentencing | Sentences and orders affirmed |
| Adequacy of appellate process under Anders/Leon/Shattuck | Anders brief filed; client notified and given opportunity to file pro se motion for reconsideration | Appellate counsel sought to be relieved after Anders brief; Ward did not file pro se brief | Court accepted Anders procedure, released counsel after decision, and noted Ward has 30 days for in propria persona reconsideration |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 368 U.S. 738 (establishes procedure for counsel to seek withdrawal when no meritorious issues exist)
- State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297 (adopts Anders review procedure in Arizona)
- State v. Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582 (procedures for advising defendant of appellate options and post‑decision relief)