Opinion
2 CA-CR 2011-0131
09-26-2011
THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. EMMANUEL DEMITRIUS MCKINNEY, Appellant.
Tucson Attorneys for Appellant
NOTICE: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c); ARCAP 28(c); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Not for Publication
Rule 111, Rules of
the Supreme Court
APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PIMA COUNTY
Cause No. CR20103000001
Honorable Deborah Bernini, Judge
Honorable Jane L. Eikleberry, Judge
AFFIRMED
Robert J. Hirsh, Pima County Public Defender
By David J. Euchner
Tucson
Attorneys for Appellant
VASQUEZ, Presiding Judge.
¶1 Appellant Emmanuel McKinney was convicted after a jury trial of second-degree burglary and possession of burglary tools. After he admitted having two historical prior felony convictions, the trial court sentenced him to enhanced, substantially mitigated, concurrent prison terms of 7.5 and 2.25 years. Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Smith v. Robbins, 528 U.S. 259 (2000), Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), State v. Nash, 104 Ariz. 297, 451 P.2d 878 (1969), and State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, 2 P.3d 89 (App. 1999), stating he has found no "arguably meritorious" issue to raise and requests that we "search the record for error." McKinney has not filed a supplemental brief.
¶2 We view the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdicts. See State v. Stroud, 209 Ariz. 410, ¶ 6, 103 P.3d 912, 914 (2005). So viewed, the evidence, including the testimony of a neighbor who witnessed the incident and police officers who had been involved in McKinney's arrest, established McKinney, with the intent to commit a theft or felony, had entered the victims' home by breaking a window with a rock, thereby committing the offense of second-degree burglary in violation of A.R.S. § 13-1507. The evidence also established McKinney had possessed burglary tools, specifically gloves he intended to use or used when committing the burglary, in violation of A.R.S. § 13-1505(A)(1) and (C). The record establishes prison terms were lawful, that is, within the statutory parameters, and were imposed in a lawful manner.
¶3 We have reviewed the entire record for reversible error and have found none. Therefore, we affirm the convictions and the sentences imposed.
________________
GARYE L. VASQUEZ, Presiding Judge
CONCURRING:
________________
PHILIP G. ESPINOSA, Judge
____________
VIRGINIA C. KELLY, Judge