Opinion
1 CA-CR 22-0352
02-28-2023
STATE OF ARIZONA Appellee, v. STEVEN PETERSON, Appellant.
Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix By Alice Jones Counsel for Appellee Zhivago Law, Phoenix By Kerrie M. Droban Zhivago Counsel for Appellant
Not for Publication - Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court
Appeal from the Superior Court in Navajo County No. S0900CR201900481 The Honorable Dale P. Nielson, Judge
Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix By Alice Jones Counsel for Appellee
Zhivago Law, Phoenix By Kerrie M. Droban Zhivago Counsel for Appellant
Judge Randall M. Howe delivered the decision of the court, in which Presiding Judge David D. Weinzweig and Judge D. Steven Williams joined.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
HOWE, JUDGE
¶1 This appeal is filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297 (1969). Counsel for Steven Peterson has advised this court that she has found no arguable questions of law and asks us to search the record for fundamental error. Peterson was convicted of multiple counts of luring a minor for sexual exploitation and sexual conduct with a minor and sentenced to prison for a total of seven years and to lifetime probation. He was given an opportunity to file a supplemental brief in propria persona; he has not done so. After reviewing the record, we affirm Peterson's convictions and sentences.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
¶2 We view the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the judgment and resolve all reasonable inferences against Peterson. See State v. Fontes, 195 Ariz. 229, 230 ¶ 2 (App. 1998). Peterson is married to Kristen Sandersen, and they have two twin children. In the summer of 2018, 30-year-old Peterson met 15-year-old Ashley at a car event in Navajo County. Ashley and her brother, Mark, lived with their grandparents a block away from Peterson and Sandersen's house. Ashley began "hanging out" at their house many times a week, including after school. Mark and Ashley's boyfriend, Tom, sometimes joined. They watched movies or barbecued, and Ashley spent time with the children, although she was not their babysitter. Peterson let Ashley drink and vape at their house. Peterson's relationship with Ashley quickly became more sexual; he began flirting with her and touching her private parts. But when others were around, Peterson treated Ashley like his daughter.
We use pseudonyms to protect the privacy of the victim and witnesses.
¶3 Between August and December 2018, Peterson performed sexual acts with Ashley on three separate occasions. The first time involved an attempted threesome with Sandersen while their children were locked in their rooms. Afterwards, Peterson had sex with Sandersen while Ashley watched, then had sex with Ashley. After, Peterson told Ashley that she "bled on the bed." She had been a virgin.
¶4 On the second occasion, Peterson and Ashley were sitting on the living room couch at his house. Peterson asked if Ashley wanted to have some "fun," and penetrated her with his finger and penis. On the third occasion, Peterson and Ashley again were sitting on the living room couch at his house. He made Ashley perform oral sex on him.
¶5 Ashley eventually told her grandparents about Peterson's behavior, but Peterson denied the allegations. Ashley later talked with her school counselor about the incidents. In May 2019, a grand jury indicted Peterson on three counts of luring a minor for sexual exploitation, a class 3 felony, and five counts of sexual conduct with a minor, a class 6 felony. At the arraignment, he was released on his own recognizance. Peterson initially signed a plea agreement but requested a change of plea. The State made him another offer, which he declined. The court held a jury trial. At the close of the State's case in chief, Peterson moved for an Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 20 judgment of acquittal on the first three counts, which the court denied.
¶6 The jury found Peterson guilty on all eight counts. The court sentenced Peterson to a total of seven years' imprisonment at the Arizona Department of Corrections. He was sentenced to a term of 3.5 years' imprisonment for one count of luring, which ran concurrent to two one-year prison terms for sexual conduct and one 1.75-year prison term for sexual conduct. The four counts would run consecutive to two concurrent terms of 3.5 years' imprisonment for two counts of luring. These counts were presumptive, non-dangerous, and non-repetitive. On the remaining two counts of sexual conduct, he was sentenced to lifetime probation to begin upon release from prison. He was awarded 32 days of presentence incarceration credit.
DISCUSSION
¶7 We review Peterson's convictions and sentences for fundamental error. See State v. Flores, 227 Ariz. 509, 512 ¶ 12 (App. 2011). Counsel for Peterson has advised this court that after a diligent search of the entire record, counsel has found no arguable question of law. We have read and considered counsel's brief and fully reviewed the record for reversible error, see Leon, 104 Ariz. at 300, and find none. The proceedings were conducted in compliance with the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, the Arizona Rules of Evidence, and constitutional requirements. So far as the record reveals, counsel represented Peterson at all stages of the proceedings, and the sentences imposed were within the statutory guidelines. We decline to order briefing and affirm Peterson's convictions and sentences.
¶8 Upon the filing of this decision, defense counsel shall inform Peterson of the status of the appeal and of his future options. Counsel has no further obligations unless, upon review, counsel finds an issue appropriate for submission to the Arizona Supreme Court by petition for review. See State v. Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582, 584-85 (1984). Peterson shall have 30 days from the date of this decision to proceed, if he desires, with a pro per motion for reconsideration or petition for review.
CONCLUSION
¶9 For the foregoing reasons, we affirm.