Opinion
1 CA-CR 20-0505
09-30-2021
STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. LLOYD LEE CRACRAFT, Appellant.
Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix By Linley Wilson Counsel for Appellee Maricopa County Public Defender's Office, Phoenix By Paul J. Prato Counsel for Appellant
Not for Publication - Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court
Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2019-128649-001 The Honorable Aryeh Schwartz, Judge
Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix By Linley Wilson Counsel for Appellee
Maricopa County Public Defender's Office, Phoenix By Paul J. Prato Counsel for Appellant
Chief Judge Kent E. Cattani delivered the decision of the Court, in which Judge Samuel A. Thumma and Judge Brian Y. Furuya joined.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
CATTANI, CHIEF JUDGE
¶1 Lloyd Lee Cracraft appeals his convictions and sentences for first-degree trafficking in stolen property and third-degree burglary. Cracraft's counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297 (1969), certifying that, after a diligent search of the record, he found no arguable question of law that was not frivolous. Cracraft was given the opportunity to file a supplemental brief but did not do so. Counsel asks this court to search the record for reversible error. See State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, 537, ¶ 30 (App. 1999). After reviewing the record, we affirm Cracraft's convictions and sentences.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
¶2 The evening of May 31, 2019, three men walked into a convenience store, then crossed into the authorized personnel area behind the counter in a single file line. The men dumped boxes of two different brands of cigarettes into a duffel bag and bundled stacks of scratch lottery tickets together to carry out of the store by hand. The men left without paying for the tickets or cigarettes. The convenience store manager estimated the value of the stolen items to be between $3,000 and $3,050.
¶3 Later that evening, a suspect matching Cracraft's description was shown on surveillance video approaching the counter at a different convenience store nearby to cash out lottery tickets. Phoenix Police Officers saw Cracraft closing the passenger door of a blue coupe in the parking lot as they were patrolling the area. The officers pulled around the building to approach Cracraft, and they apprehended him after a chase. The officers searched Cracraft and found a single key to the coupe. Inside the car, the officers found scratch lottery tickets as well as two backpacks stuffed with a total of 67 packs of cigarettes, all brands that had been stolen earlier that evening.
¶4 Detectives seized gray and black high-top shoes from Cracraft at the jail. The shoes appeared to match those worn by the person captured on surveillance footage stealing from the first convenience store and cashing out lottery tickets at the other convenience store. The property seized from Cracraft at the jail also included a bandana and a belt, both of which were similar to what the person in the surveillance video was wearing. According to a report by the Arizona Lottery Commission, other stolen tickets were cashed out at different convenience stores.
¶5 The State charged Cracraft with trafficking in stolen property, see A.R.S. §§ 13-2301(B)(2)-(3), -2307(B), burglary in the third degree, see A.R.S. § 13-1506(A)(1), misconduct involving weapons (prohibited possessor), see A.R.S. § 13-3102(A)(4), and unlawful use of means of transportation, see A.R.S. § 13-1803. The unlawful use of means charge was later dismissed at the State's request. Cracraft pleaded guilty to misconduct involving weapons, and the jury found him guilty of the two remaining counts. The jury also found multiple aggravating circumstances (presence of an accomplice, pecuniary gain, financial harm to the victim), as well as that Cracraft committed the offenses while on felony probation. See A.R.S. §§ 13-701(D)(4), (6), (9), (27), -708(C).
¶6 The superior court later found that Cracraft had four historical prior felony convictions and one nonhistorical prior felony conviction. The court sentenced him as a category three repetitive offender to concurrent, presumptive terms of imprisonment, the longer of which is 15.75 years, with credit for 291 days of presentence incarceration.
¶7 The superior court granted Cracraft leave to file a delayed appeal, and he timely appealed thereafter.
DISCUSSION
¶8 We have read and considered counsel's brief and have reviewed the record for reversible error. See Leon, 104 Ariz. at 300. We find none.
¶9 Cracraft was present and represented by counsel at all stages of the proceedings against him. The record reflects that the superior court afforded Cracraft all of his constitutional and statutory rights, and that the proceedings were conducted in accordance with the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure. The court conducted appropriate pretrial hearings, and the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support the jury's verdicts. Cracraft's sentences fall within the ranges prescribed by law, with proper credit given for presentence incarceration.
CONCLUSION
¶10 Cracraft's convictions and sentences are affirmed. After the filing of this decision, defense counsel's obligations pertaining to Cracraft's representation in this appeal will end after informing Cracraft of the outcome of this appeal and his future options, unless counsel's review reveals an issue appropriate for submission to the Arizona Supreme Court by petition for review. See State v. Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582, 584-85 (1984). On the court's own motion, Cracraft has 30 days from the date of this decision to proceed, if he desires, with a pro se motion for reconsideration or petition for review.