Opinion
No. 2 CA-CR 2018-0124
08-13-2019
THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. EULANDAS J. FLOWERS, 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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. 31.19(e).
Appeal from the Superior Court in Pinal County
No. S1100CR201500924
The Honorable Steven J. Fuller, Judge
AFFIRMED
COUNSEL
Harriette P. Levitt, Tucson
Counsel for Appellant
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Staring authored the decision of the Court, in which Chief Judge Vásquez and Judge Espinosa concurred.
STARING, Presiding Judge:
¶1 Following a jury trial, appellant Eulandas Flowers was convicted on three counts of promoting prison contraband. The trial court sentenced him to presumptive, concurrent and consecutive prison terms totaling 11.5 years. 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 she has reviewed the record and has found no "arguable issues on appeal." Counsel has asked us to search the record for fundamental error.
¶2 In a supplemental, pro se petition Flowers argues the trial court abused its discretion in denying his challenge to the warrant for a search of his person and denied him due process by preventing him from "presenting his defense."
¶3 Viewed in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdict, see State v. Delgado, 232 Ariz. 182, ¶ 2 (App. 2013), the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's findings of guilt, see A.R.S. §§ 13-2501, 13-2505(A)(3). The evidence presented at trial showed Flowers, who had a historical prior felony conviction and was confined in a correctional facility, was found with various items including two cell phones, marijuana, and a knife in his rectum. We further conclude the sentences imposed are within the statutory limits. See A.R.S. §§ 13-703(I), 13-2505(G).
¶4 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for fundamental, reversible error, including error related to the issues raised by Flowers, and have found none. Therefore, Flowers's convictions and sentences are affirmed.