Opinion
2 CA-CR 2024-0101
09-17-2024
The State of Arizona, Appellee, v. Alejandro Perez, Appellant.
Michael J. Dew, Phoenix Counsel for Appellant
Not for Publication - Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court
Appeal from the Superior Court in Yavapai County No. CR202280661 The Honorable Michael R. Bluff, Judge
Michael J. Dew, Phoenix Counsel for Appellant
Judge Eckerstrom authored the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Gard and Chief Judge Staring concurred.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
ECKERSTROM, JUDGE
¶1 After a jury trial, appellant Alejandro Perez was convicted of two counts of promoting prison contraband. The trial court sentenced him to concurrent 15.75-year prison terms.
¶2 On appeal, 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 and has been "unable to find any arguable question of law that is not frivolous." Consistent with Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, ¶ 30, counsel has provided a factual and procedural history of the case with citations to the record and has asked this court to search the record for reversible error. Perez has filed a supplemental brief, raising claims of prosecutorial misconduct, insufficient evidence, improper testimony and amendment of the indictment, disclosure and confrontation clause violations, and ineffective assistance of counsel.
¶3 Viewed in the light most favorable to affirming the verdicts, see State v. Holle, 240 Ariz. 300, ¶ 2 (2016), the evidence is sufficient here, see A.R.S. §§ 13-105(11), (26), 13-2501(1), (2), 13-2505(A)(3), 13-3401(6)(c)(xxxviii), (20)(ww). In November 2022, Perez-an inmate at a Yavapai County jail-was found with a folded piece of paper containing methamphetamine in his shirt pocket and a bag containing fentanyl pills in his scrotum area. A usable quantity of each drug was also found in Perez's cell.
¶4 The record supports the trial court's finding of at least two historical prior felony convictions. See A.R.S. § 13-105(22). The sentences imposed are within the statutory range. See A.R.S. §§ 13-703(C), (J), 13-2505(G).
¶5 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for reversible error and have found none. See State v. Fuller, 143 Ariz. 571, 575 (1985). We have also considered the issues raised by Perez in his supplemental brief and have determined none are arguable issues requiring further briefing. See State v. Thompson, 229 Ariz. 43, ¶ 3 (App. 2012). We therefore affirm Perez's convictions and sentences.