Opinion
No. 1 CA-CR 18-0450
06-11-2019
STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. MICHAEL LYNN HILL, Appellant.
COUNSEL Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix By Joseph T. Maziarz Counsel for Appellee Law Office of Nicole Countryman, Phoenix By Nicole Countryman Counsel for Appellant
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.
Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
No. CR2017-155970-001
The Honorable Pamela S. Gates, Judge
AFFIRMED
COUNSEL
Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix
By Joseph T. Maziarz
Counsel for Appellee
Law Office of Nicole Countryman, Phoenix
By Nicole Countryman
Counsel for Appellant
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge David D. Weinzweig delivered the decision of the Court, in which Judge Kent E. Cattani and Judge James P. Beene joined.
WEINZWEIG, Judge:
¶1 Michael Lynn Hill appeals his convictions and sentences for possession or use of a dangerous drug (class 4 felony) and possession or use of marijuana (class 6 felony). After searching the record and finding no arguable, non-frivolous question of law, Hill's counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297 (1969), asking this court to search the record for fundamental error. Hill filed a supplemental brief. We affirm Hill's convictions and sentences.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
¶2 Police responded to a trespass call and found Hill in the parking lot of an apartment complex, standing outside the truck and camper where he lived. Police arrested Hill. An officer searched Hill's fanny pack and found methamphetamine and marijuana (less than two pounds). At the time of his arrest, Hill was on supervised release for a previous felony offense.
¶3 The State charged Hill with possession or use of a dangerous drug (count 1), and possession or use of less than two pounds of marijuana (count 2). The court held a four-day jury trial in April 2018 where several exhibits were admitted and three witnesses testified, including two police officers and a forensic scientist. The jury returned guilty verdicts on both counts. At sentencing, Hill admitted he had two historical prior felony convictions. The superior court sentenced him as a category 3 repetitive offender to concurrent, minimum prison terms of 8 years for count 1 and 3 years for count 2, adding 2 years to each count because the jury found that Hill committed both offenses while on supervised release for a previous felony. See A.R.S. § 13-708(D). Hill timely appealed.
DISCUSSION
¶4 Hill filed a belated supplemental brief listing 21 issues without any significant argument. We have read and considered Hill's
brief and have reviewed the record for reversible error. See Leon, 104 Ariz. at 300. We find none.
¶5 Hill was present and represented by counsel at all stages of the proceedings against him. The record reflects that the superior court afforded Hill all his constitutional and statutory rights, and that the proceedings were conducted in accordance with the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure. The court conducted appropriate pretrial hearings, and the evidence presented at trial and summarized above was sufficient to support the jury's verdicts. Hill's sentences fall within the range prescribed by law, with sufficient credit given for presentence incarceration.
CONCLUSION
¶6 We affirm Hill's convictions and sentences. Counsel's obligations in this appeal will end once Hill is informed of the outcome and his future options, unless counsel finds an issue appropriate for submission to the Arizona Supreme Court by petition for review. See State v. Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582, 584-85 (1984). On the court's own motion, Hill has 30 days from the date of this decision to proceed with a pro se motion for reconsideration or petition for review.