Opinion
No. 2 CA-CR 2013-0409
07-07-2014
THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. JESUS VITELA-ARAGON, Appellant.
Angela C. Poliquin, Hamilton, Montana 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24.
Appeal from the Superior Court in Pima County
No. CR20120903001
The Honorable Paul E. Tang, Judge
AFFIRMED
COUNSEL
Angela C. Poliquin, Hamilton, Montana
Counsel for Appellant
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Kelly authored the decision of the Court, in which Judge Vásquez and Judge Olson concurred. KELLY, Presiding Judge:
The Hon. Robert Carter Olson, a retired judge of the Arizona Superior Court, is called back to active duty to serve on this case pursuant to orders of this court and the supreme court.
¶1 After a jury trial, defendant Jesus Vitela-Aragon was convicted of child molestation, a class two felony and a dangerous crime against children. The trial court sentenced Aragon to the presumptive prison term of seventeen years. Counsel has filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297, 451 P.2d 878 (1969), and State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, 2 P.3d 89 (App. 1999), avowing she found no arguably meritorious issue to raise and asking this court to review the record for error. Vitela-Aragon has not filed a supplemental brief.
¶2 The evidence at trial, viewed in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdict, State v. Lizardi, 234 Ariz. 501, ¶ 2, 323 P.3d 1152, 1153 (App. 2014), established Vitela-Aragon had reached inside the thirteen- or fourteen-year-old victim's jeans through the zipper and placed his hand on the victim's penis, while the victim was in a bed in Vitela-Aragon's trailer. Thus, there was sufficient evidence establishing Vitela-Aragon committed the offense of child molestation, a class two felony, in violation of A.R.S. § 13-1410, and a dangerous crime against children. We see no error during trial that could be characterized as fundamental, reversible error.
¶3 Similarly, in imposing the presumptive prison term of seventeen years, the trial court sentenced Vitela-Aragon to a lawful term and imposed it in a lawful matter. See A.R.S. § 13-705(D). Therefore, we affirm the conviction and the sentence.