Opinion
No. 2 CA-CR 2016-0097
07-26-2016
THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. CRISTOBAL ARCOS-CRUZ, Appellant.
COUNSEL Harriette P. Levitt, 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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 Pinal County
No. S1100CR201503061
The Honorable Steven J. Fuller, Judge
AFFIRMED
COUNSEL Harriette P. Levitt, Tucson
Counsel for Appellant
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Howard authored the decision of the Court, in which Judge Espinosa and Judge Kelly concurred. HOWARD, 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, appellant Cristobal Arcos-Cruz was convicted of possession of four pounds or more of marijuana for sale. The trial court sentenced him to five years' imprisonment. 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), stating she has reviewed the record and has found "no arguable issues" to raise on appeal. Counsel has asked us to search the record for fundamental error. Arcos-Cruz 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 Arcos-Cruz was found by law enforcement personnel in a vehicle with a bundle of forty-nine pounds of marijuana and several other people, some of whom, including Arcos-Cruz, were wearing camouflage clothing. Arcos-Cruz admitted to a deputy at the scene that he had carried marijuana into the United States from Mexico. We further conclude the sentence imposed is within the statutory limit. See A.R.S. §§ 13-702(D), 13-3405(A)(2), (B)(6).
¶3 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) (Anders requires court to search record for fundamental error). Therefore, Arcos-Cruz's conviction and sentence are affirmed.