From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Sexton

COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO DEPARTMENT A
Nov 29, 2011
2 CA-CR 2011-0104 (Ariz. Ct. App. Nov. 29, 2011)

Opinion

2 CA-CR 2011-0104

11-29-2011

THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. JEFFREY LYNN SEXTON, Appellant.

Robert J. Hirsh, Pima County Public Defender By Robert J. McWhirter 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Not for Publication Rule 111, Rules of the Supreme Court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. CR20100851001


Honorable James A. Soto, Judge


AFFIRMED

Robert J. Hirsh, Pima County Public Defender

By Robert J. McWhirter

Tucson

Attorneys for Appellant
ECKERSTROM, Presiding Judge.

¶1 After a jury trial, appellant Jeffrey Sexton was convicted of second-degree burglary, child molestation, and sexual conduct with a minor under the age of fifteen. The trial court imposed presumptive, consecutive sentences, the longest of which was a term of life in prison with the possibility of parole after thirty-five years. Counsel has filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297, 451 P.2d 878 (1969), and State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, 2 P.3d 89 (App. 1999), stating he has reviewed the record and has "found no arguably meritorious issue for appeal." Counsel has asked us to search the record for fundamental error. Sexton has not filed a supplemental brief.

¶2 Viewed in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdict, the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding of guilt. See State v. Tamplin, 195 Ariz. 246, ¶ 2, 986 P.2d 914, 914 (App. 1999). The evidence presented at trial showed Sexton had entered the bedroom of a ten-year old boy through a window, fondled his genitals, and digitally penetrated his anus.

¶3 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for fundamental, reversible error and have found none. Therefore, we affirm Sexton's convictions and sentences.

PETER J. ECKERSTROM, Presiding Judge CONCURRING: JOSEPH W. HOWARD, Chief Judge J. WILLIAM BRAMMER, JR., Judge


Summaries of

State v. Sexton

COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO DEPARTMENT A
Nov 29, 2011
2 CA-CR 2011-0104 (Ariz. Ct. App. Nov. 29, 2011)
Case details for

State v. Sexton

Case Details

Full title:THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. JEFFREY LYNN SEXTON, Appellant.

Court:COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO DEPARTMENT A

Date published: Nov 29, 2011

Citations

2 CA-CR 2011-0104 (Ariz. Ct. App. Nov. 29, 2011)