Opinion
No. 2 CA-CR 2017-0371
08-28-2018
THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. EFRAIN HERNANDEZ, Appellant.
COUNSEL Michael Villarreal, Florence 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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. S1100CR201202135
The Honorable Joseph R. Georgini, Judge
AFFIRMED
COUNSEL
Michael Villarreal, Florence
Counsel for Appellant
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Judge Espinosa authored the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Vásquez and Judge Eppich concurred.
ESPINOSA, Judge:
¶1 After a jury trial, Efrain Hernandez was convicted of conspiracy to commit armed robbery, armed robbery, kidnapping, aggravated assault, and theft of $100,000 or more. The trial court sentenced him to concurrent prison terms, the longest of which are fifteen years.
¶2 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), asserting he has reviewed the record but found no arguably meritorious issue to raise on appeal. Consistent with Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, ¶ 32, he has provided "a detailed factual and procedural history of the case with citations to the record" and asks this court to search the record for error. Hernandez has not filed a supplemental brief.
¶3 Viewed in the light most favorable to sustaining the jury's verdicts, see State v. Tamplin, 195 Ariz. 246, ¶ 2 (App. 1999), the evidence is sufficient to support the verdicts here, see A.R.S. §§ 13-1001, 13-1204(A)(2), 13-1304(A), 13-1802(A)(1), (G), 13-1904(A). In December 2011, an armed robbery occurred at a large retail store where Hernandez was employed as a manager. An individual entered the retail store's cash office, threatened an employee with a gun, tied her up, and left with over $150,000 in cash. The manner of the robbery indicated the assailant had inside knowledge of the store's procedures for moving, counting, and storing cash, and Hernandez had directed a support manager not to use the manager's office near the cash office where the assailant hid before the robbery. He also participated in numerous calls on his cell phone with individuals (including his brother) who were nearby and in contact with the assailant via cell phone during the robbery.
¶4 Hernandez admitted that the armed robbery, kidnapping, and assault were dangerous offenses and further admitted to several aggravating factors applicable to all his offenses. The sentences imposed
were within the statutory range. See A.R.S. §§ 13-702(D), 13-704(A), 13-1003(D), 13-1204(E), 13-1304(B), 13-1802(G), 13-1904(B).
¶5 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for reversible error, and have found none. Hernandez's convictions and sentences are affirmed.