From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Parker

Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division One, Department B
Jan 11, 1973
505 P.2d 278 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1973)

Opinion

No. 1 CA-CR 455.

January 11, 1973.

Prosecution for first-degree burglary and aggravated battery. Defendant pleaded guilty in the Superior Court, Maricopa County, Cause No. CR-69173, Robert L. Myers, J., and appealed. The Court of Appeals, Haire, Chief Judge, Division 1, held that where defendant was represented by appointed counsel who filed a brief asking to withdraw and the record fully established a factual basis adequate to support defendant's guilty plea, the reviewing court would examine the record for fundamental error, and, finding none, would affirm.

Affirmed.

Gary K. Nelson, Atty. Gen., by Peter M. Van Orman, Asst. Atty. Gen., Phoenix, for appellee.

Ross P. Lee, Maricopa County Public Defender, by James H. Kemper, Deputy Public Defender, Phoenix, for appellant.


Defendant Billy Earl Parker was initially charged with first degree burglary and aggravated battery. At his arraignment he pled not guilty to both charges. Thereafter, the state filed a motion to add an allegation of prior conviction. Subsequently, defendant came before the court again, indicating his desire to plead guilty to the charge of first degree burglary with the state to withdraw its allegation of prior conviction and to dismiss the charge of aggravated battery. His plea of guilty was accepted by the court and he was then sentenced to not less than five nor more than seven years in the Arizona State Prison.

On appeal, defendant has been represented by appointed counsel, and a brief has been filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297, 451 P.2d 878 (1969).

The only arguable question presented on appeal is whether or not the record shows that the trial court adequately established that the defendant understood the nature of the charges against him. In essence, this is the "elements of the crime" argument which has been previously presented to and rejected by this Court on numerous occasions. See State v. Fulper, 16 Ariz. App. 357, 493 P.2d 524 (1972); State v. Liden, 16 Ariz. App. 238, 492 P.2d 734 (1972); State v. Moreno, 16 Ariz. App. 191, 492 P.2d 440 (1972); State v. Jackson, 14 Ariz. App. 594, 485 P.2d 583 (1971). The record fully establishes a factual basis adequate to support the plea.

As required by A.R.S. § 13-1715, we have examined the record for fundamental error and find none. The judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.

JACOBSON, C.J., Division 1, and EUBANK, P.J., Department B, concur.


Summaries of

State v. Parker

Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division One, Department B
Jan 11, 1973
505 P.2d 278 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1973)
Case details for

State v. Parker

Case Details

Full title:STATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. Billy Earl PARKER, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division One, Department B

Date published: Jan 11, 1973

Citations

505 P.2d 278 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1973)
505 P.2d 278

Citing Cases

State v. Edwards

The record also indicates that the trial court was aware of the defendant's age and the fact that he had been…