From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Granados

COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO DEPARTMENT B
May 8, 2013
2 CA-CR 2012-0489 (Ariz. Ct. App. May. 8, 2013)

Opinion

2 CA-CR 2012-0489

05-08-2013

THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. ALVARO MAYO GRANADOS, Appellant.

Harriette P. Levitt Attorney for Appellant


NOTICE: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c); ARCAP 28(c); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Not for Publication

Rule 111, Rules of

the Supreme Court


APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PINAL COUNTY


Cause No. S1100CR201101970


Honorable Bradley M. Soos, Judge Pro Tempore


AFFIRMED

Harriette P. Levitt

Tucson
Attorney for Appellant
VÁSQUEZ, Presiding Judge. ¶1 After a jury trial, appellant Alvaro Granados was convicted of aggravated driving under the influence of an intoxicant and aggravated driving with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .15 or greater, both while a person under the age of fifteen was in the vehicle. The trial court sentenced him to mitigated prison terms of .33 years, to be served concurrently. ¶2 Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, 2 P.3d 89 (App. 1999), avowing she has reviewed the entire record and found no arguable issues to raise on appeal. Consistent with Clark, she has provided "a detailed factual and procedural history of the case with citations to the record," 196 Ariz. 530, ¶ 32, 2 P.3d at 97, and asks this court to search the record for error. ¶3 We view the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the jury's verdicts, see State v. Tamplin, 195 Ariz. 246, ¶ 2, 986 P.2d 914, 914 (App. 1999), and conclude the evidence was sufficient to support these convictions. See A.R.S. §§ 28-1381(A)(1), 28-1382(A)(1), 28-1383(A)(3). At trial, a Pinal County Sheriff's deputy testified that at approximately 11:30 a.m. on December 23, 2010, Granados failed to stop at a stop sign before merging into traffic. The deputy also saw a two-year-old child standing in the back seat of Granados's vehicle. After he initiated a traffic stop, the deputy noticed Granados had glassy, bloodshot, watery eyes and a strong odor of intoxicants on his breath, and Granados staggered when the deputy asked him to step out of the vehicle. The deputy conducted a Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus test, which was positive for signs of impairment, and administered a preliminary breath test, which was positive for the presence of alcohol. Granados was arrested and submitted to breath tests, administered at 12:27 and 12:33 p.m., each of which revealed a BAC greater than .15. Granados was represented by counsel, and his sentence was authorized by statute and imposed in a lawful manner. See A.R.S. §§ 13-702(B), (D). ¶4 In our examination of the record pursuant to Anders, we have found no reversible error and no arguable issue warranting further appellate review. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. Accordingly, Granados's convictions and sentences are affirmed.

______________

GARYE L. VÁSQUEZ, Presiding Judge
CONCURRING: ______________
PHILIP G. ESPINOSA, Judge
______________
VIRGINIA C. KELLY, Judge


Summaries of

State v. Granados

COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO DEPARTMENT B
May 8, 2013
2 CA-CR 2012-0489 (Ariz. Ct. App. May. 8, 2013)
Case details for

State v. Granados

Case Details

Full title:THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. ALVARO MAYO GRANADOS, Appellant.

Court:COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO DEPARTMENT B

Date published: May 8, 2013

Citations

2 CA-CR 2012-0489 (Ariz. Ct. App. May. 8, 2013)