From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Alire

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO
Nov 27, 2019
No. 2 CA-CR 2019-0066 (Ariz. Ct. App. Nov. 27, 2019)

Opinion

No. 2 CA-CR 2019-0066

11-27-2019

THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. ERNESTO ALIRE SR., Appellant.

COUNSEL James Fullin, Pima County Legal Defender By Jeffrey Kautenburger, Assistant Legal 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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. CR20172556001
The Honorable Jeffrey T. Bergin, Judge

AFFIRMED

COUNSEL

James Fullin, Pima County Legal Defender
By Jeffrey Kautenburger, Assistant Legal Defender, Tucson
Counsel for Appellant

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Staring authored the decision of the Court, in which Chief Judge Vásquez and Judge Brearcliffe concurred.

STARING, Presiding Judge:

¶1 After a jury trial, Ernesto Alire Sr. was convicted of reckless child abuse without the risk of death or serious physical injury and sentenced to a 3.5-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 (App. 1999), stating he reviewed the record but found no "tenable legal issue to present on appeal," and asking this court to review the record for error. Alire has not filed a supplemental brief.

¶2 Viewed in the light most favorable to sustaining the jury's verdict, see State v. Tamplin, 195 Ariz. 246, ¶ 2 (App. 1999), the evidence is sufficient here, see A.R.S. § 13-3623(B)(2). In May 2017, after an altercation with his thirteen-year-old son, Alire drove away in his car as his son was reaching through the driver's side window to strike at him, causing his son to be dragged a short distance and then to fall. Sufficient evidence also supports the trial court's finding that Alire had four prior felony convictions and it correctly determined he should be sentenced as a category-three repetitive offender. See A.R.S. §§ 13-105(22)(d), 13-703(C). The sentence imposed is within the statutory range. See A.R.S. §§ 13-703(J), 13-3623(B)(2).

¶3 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for error and found none. Accordingly, we affirm Alire's conviction and sentence.


Summaries of

State v. Alire

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO
Nov 27, 2019
No. 2 CA-CR 2019-0066 (Ariz. Ct. App. Nov. 27, 2019)
Case details for

State v. Alire

Case Details

Full title:THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. ERNESTO ALIRE SR., Appellant.

Court:ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO

Date published: Nov 27, 2019

Citations

No. 2 CA-CR 2019-0066 (Ariz. Ct. App. Nov. 27, 2019)