Opinion
No. 2 CA-CR 2014-0273
04-22-2015
THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. MELISSA ROSE SOQUI, Appellant.
COUNSEL Heard Law Firm, Mesa By James L. Heard 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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 Pinal County
No. S1100CR201300536
The Honorable Henry G. Gooday Jr., Judge
AFFIRMED
COUNSEL Heard Law Firm, Mesa
By James L. Heard
Counsel for Appellant
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Chief Judge Eckerstrom authored the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Miller and Judge Espinosa concurred. ECKERSTROM, Chief Judge:
¶1 After a jury trial, Melissa Soqui was convicted of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument, a dangerous, domestic violence offense. The trial court sentenced her to a six-year prison term. Counsel has filed a brief in compliance with 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 arguable issue to raise on 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 asks this court to search the record for error. Soqui has not filed a supplemental brief.
¶2 Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdict, see State v. Tamplin, 195 Ariz. 246, ¶ 2, 986 P.2d 914, 914 (App. 1999), sufficient evidence supports the jury's verdict here. In April 2013, Soqui slashed her husband several times with razor blades, causing several lacerations. See A.R.S. §§ 13-105(13), 13-1203(A)(1), 13-1204(A)(2), 13-3601(A)(1). Her prison term is within the statutory limit and was imposed properly. See A.R.S. §§ 13-704(A), 13-1204(D).
We cite the current versions of these statutes, as they have not changed in relevant part since Soqui committed her offense.
¶3 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for fundamental error and found none. See State v. Fuller, 143 Ariz. 571, 575, 694 P.2d 1185, 1189 (1985) (Anders requires court to search record for fundamental error). Accordingly, we affirm Soqui's conviction and sentence.