Opinion
No. 2 CA-CR 2014-0260
08-10-2015
THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. DAKOTA BLAKE WILLIAMS, Appellant.
COUNSEL Law Office of Susan M. Crawford, Mesa By Susan M. Crawford 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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. 31.24.
Appeal from the Superior Court in Pinal County
No. S1100CR201300515
The Honorable Bradley M. Soos, Judge Pro Tempore
AFFIRMED
COUNSEL Law Office of Susan M. Crawford, Mesa
By Susan M. Crawford
Counsel for Appellant
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Judge Howard authored the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Vásquez and Judge Kelly concurred. HOWARD, Judge:
The Hon. Virginia C. Kelly, a retired judge of this 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, appellant Dakota Williams was convicted of four counts of sexual assault and one count each of aggravated assault, unlawful imprisonment, and sexual abuse, some of them dangerous offenses. The trial court sentenced him to a combination of concurrent and consecutive, presumptive sentences for a total of 31.5 years' imprisonment. Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, 2 P.3d 89 (App. 1999), avowing she has reviewed the record and found no arguable issue to raise on appeal. Consistent with Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, ¶ 32, 2 P.3d at 97, she 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 fundamental or reversible error. Williams has not filed a supplemental brief.
¶2 We conclude substantial evidence supported the jury's verdicts. See A.R.S. §§ 13-1203, 13-1204(A)(2), 13-1303, 13-1404(a), and 13-1406. In sum, I.D. Jr. testified that in January 2013, Williams drove her to a desolate area, locked the car's doors so I.D. could not leave and, at knifepoint, forced her to engage in oral and anal sex. And in February 2013, a Pinal County Sheriff's Sergeant responded to a 9-1-1 call about a sexual assault and found E.A.-V. on Interstate 10. E.A.-V. later told a forensic nurse examiner a man had taken her into the desert, kissed her neck and breasts, and then forced her to engage in oral and vaginal sex. She testified at trial that, when Williams began kissing, biting, and touching her, she struggled with him, telling him to stop and that she had just wanted a ride. Williams testified at trial and admitted having had oral and anal sex with I.D., and oral and vaginal sex with E.A.-V., on the nights alleged, but stated that on both occasions the sex acts were consensual.
In conducting a "head-to-toe assessment" of E.A.-V., the nurse examiner documented an abrasion to the left side of her neck. --------
¶3 We further conclude the sentences imposed were authorized by statute and imposed in a lawful manner. See A.R.S. §§ 13-702(D), 13-704(A), 13-1406(B).
¶4 In our examination of the record pursuant to Anders, we have found no fundamental or reversible error and no arguable issue warranting further appellate review. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. Accordingly, we affirm Williams's convictions and sentences.