Opinion
No. 2 CA-CR 2017-0364
08-02-2018
THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. DAVID HOWARD NEVILLE, Appellant.
COUNSEL Joel Feinman, Pima County Public Defender By Michael J. Miller, Assistant Public Defender, Tucson Counsel for Appellant
THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
See Ariz. R. Sup. Ct. 111(c)(1); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.19(e).
Appeal from the Superior Court in Pima County
No. CR20135204001
The Honorable Casey F. McGinley, Judge Pro Tempore
AFFIRMED
COUNSEL
Joel Feinman, Pima County Public Defender
By Michael J. Miller, Assistant Public Defender, Tucson
Counsel for Appellant
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Staring authored the decision of the Court, in which Chief Judge Eckerstrom and Judge Brearcliffe concurred.
STARING, Presiding Judge:
¶1 Following a jury trial, appellant David Neville was convicted of possession of a narcotic drug and possession of drug paraphernalia. The trial court sentenced him to enhanced, minimum, concurrent prison terms, the longer of which is eight years. Counsel has filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530 (App. 1999), stating he has reviewed the record and has found no "arguably meritorious issue to raise on appeal." Counsel has asked us to search the record for fundamental error. Neville has not filed a supplemental brief.
¶2 Viewed in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdicts, the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's findings of guilt. See State v. Delgado, 232 Ariz. 182, ¶ 2 (App. 2013). The evidence presented at the trial, which Neville did not attend, showed Neville had a plastic baggie containing approximately .2 grams of heroin in his pocket when he was arrested on another matter. We further conclude the sentences imposed are within the statutory limits. See A.R.S. §§ 13-703(C), (J), 13-3408(A)(1), 13-3415(A).
¶3 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for fundamental, reversible error and have found none. Therefore, Neville's convictions and sentences are affirmed.