Opinion
No. 2 CA-CR 2014-0432
08-26-2015
THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. PETER EUGENE PAPPAGEORGE, Appellant.
COUNSEL Steven Sonenberg, Pima County Public Defender By Frank P. Leto, 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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. 31.24.
Appeal from the Superior Court in Pima County
No. CR20134937001
The Honorable Teresa Godoy, Judge Pro Tempore
AFFIRMED
COUNSEL Steven Sonenberg, Pima County Public Defender
By Frank P. Leto, Assistant Public Defender, Tucson
Counsel for Appellant
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Vásquez authored the decision of the Court, in which Judge Howard and Judge Kelly concurred. VÁSQUEZ, Presiding Judge:
The Hon. Virginia C. Kelly, a retired judge of this court, is called back to active duty to serve on this case pursuant to orders of this court and our supreme court.
¶1 Following a jury trial in absentia, appellant Peter Pappageorge was convicted of aggravated driving under the influence of an intoxicant and aggravated driving with an alcohol concentration of .08 or more, both while his license was suspended, revoked, or restricted. The parties stipulated Pappageorge had a prior historical felony conviction, and the trial court sentenced him to concurrent, partially mitigated four-year prison terms, with 58 days of presentence incarceration credit.
¶2 Counsel has filed a brief citing Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, 2 P.3d 89 (App. 1999), asserting he has reviewed the record but found no "meritorious issue for appeal." Consistent with Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, ¶ 32, 2 P.3d at 97, he has provided "a detailed factual and procedural history of the case with citations to the record" and has asked this court to search the record for error. Pappageorge has not filed a supplemental brief.
¶3 Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the jury's verdicts, see State v. Tamplin, 195 Ariz. 246, ¶ 2, 986 P.2d 914, 914 (App. 1999), the evidence established that in November 2013, while his license was suspended, Pappageorge had a blood alcohol concentration of .176 within two hours of driving a vehicle. We conclude ample evidence supported the jury's findings of guilt, see A.R.S. §§ 28-1383(A)(1), 28-1381(A)(2), 28-1382(A)(1), and the sentences are within the statutory limits and were imposed properly, see A.R.S. § 13-703(B), (I).
We refer to the statutes in effect at the time of Pappageorge's offenses. See 2013 Ariz. Sess. Laws, ch. 55, § 3. --------
¶4 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for fundamental, reversible error and have found none. See State v. Fuller, 143 Ariz. 571, 575, 694 P.2d 1185, 1189 (1985). Therefore, we affirm Pappageorge's convictions and sentences.