State v. Parker

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOTICE: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c); ARCAP 28(c); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. JACK EDWARD PARKER, Appellant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. DIVISION ONE FILED: 02-25-2010 PHILIP G. URRY,CLERK BY: DN 1 CA-CR 09-0324 DEPARTMENT E MEMORANDUM DECISION (Not for Publication Rule 111, Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court) Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County Cause No. CR 2008-141760-001 DT The Honorable Michael D. Jones, Judge AFFIRMED Terry Goddard, Arizona Attorney General by Kent E. Cattani, Chief Counsel, Criminal Appeals/Capital Litigation Section Attorneys for Appellee Phoenix James J. Haas, Maricopa County Public Defender by Thomas Baird, Deputy Public Defender Attorneys for Appellant Phoenix H A L L, Judge ¶1 Jack Edward Parker (defendant) appeals from his brief in convictions and the sentences imposed. ¶2 Defendant=s appellate counsel filed a accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297, 451 P.2d 878 (1969), advising that, after a diligent search of the record, he was unable to find any arguable grounds for reversal. This court granted defendant an opportunity to file a supplemental brief, which he has not done. See State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, 537, & 30, 2 P.3d 89, 96 (App. 1999). ¶3 We review for fundamental error, error that goes to the foundation of a case or takes from the defendant a right essential to his defense. See State v. King, 158 Ariz. 419, 424, 763 P.2d 239, 244 (1988). We view the evidence presented at trial in a light most favorable to sustaining the verdict. State v. Cropper, 205 Ariz. 181, 182, & 2, 68 P.3d 407, 408 (2003). ¶4 theft Finding no reversible error, we affirm. Defendant was charged by indictment with one count of of felony, means in of transportation violation of Arizona (Count Revised I), a class Statutes three (A.R.S.) section 13-1814(A)(1) (Supp. 2008), and one count of unlawful flight from law enforcement vehicle (Count II), a class five felony, in violation of A.R.S. § 28-622.01 (2004). 2 ¶5 The following evidence was presented at trial. At approximately 3:30 a.m. the morning of July 3, 2008, J.G., an employee of Degan Construction arrived at the construction yard located at Pima and 33rd Street in Phoenix. He noticed that the gate was open and some vehicles and equipment were missing. He immediately called the police and the owner of the company. ¶6 The owner of the company informed the police that a 1999 F250 pick-up truck, a 2000 Chevy 3500 one-ton diesel pickup truck, and a 14,000-pound capacity equipment trailer were missing from the yard. He provided the police with the license plate and vehicle identification numbers of the missing vehicles and trailer. ¶7 Officer J.B. of the Phoenix Police Department later observed a vehicle matching the description of the stolen 2000 Chevy one-ton pick-up truck. A search of the license plate through the database revealed that the vehicle had been reported stolen. He conducted a search on the license plate and it came back as one of the vehicles stolen from the construction yard. Officer J.B. requested vehicle backup as well as a helicopter. Once the units arrived, the officer maneuvered directly behind the stolen vehicle and activated his overhead lights and siren. The officer testified that the vehicle then accelerated and the trailer behind the vehicle became unhitched as the vehicle sped 3 away. At that point, Officer J.B. stopped his pursuit of the vehicle to attend to the runaway trailer. ¶8 Officer C.N. of the Phoenix Police responded as back-up to Officer J.B.'s call. Department He observed that the vehicle appeared to be traveling at a high rate of speed and that it almost collided with another patrol car. The officer was able to observe that defendant was the driver. ¶9 Shortly thereafter, the vehicle was found abandoned and the police on site were notified that a local resident had reported that someone ran into his backyard. Defendant was found hiding in that backyard and was taken into custody. ¶10 After a guilty as charged. three-day trial, the jury found defendant The trial court found defendant had one historical prior felony conviction and sentenced defendant to a presumptive term of six and one-half years imprisonment on Count I and a concurrent, presumptive term of two and one-quarter years of imprisonment on Count II. ¶11 We have read and considered counsel=s brief and have searched the entire record for reversible error. Ariz. at 300, 451 P.2d at 881. See Leon, 104 We find none. All of the proceedings were conducted in compliance with the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure. Defendant was given an opportunity to speak before sentencing, and the sentence imposed was within statutory limits. Furthermore, 4 based on our review of the record, there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find that defendant committed the offenses for which he was convicted. ¶12 After obligations appeal have the pertaining ended. filing to of this defendant=s Counsel need decision, counsel=s representation do no more than in this inform defendant of the status of the appeal and his future options, unless counsel=s review reveals an issue appropriate for submission to the Arizona Supreme Court by petition for review. See State v. Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582, 584-85, 684 P.2d 154, 15657 (1984). Defendant has thirty days from the date of this decision to proceed, if he desires, with a pro per motion for reconsideration or petition for review. Accordingly, defendant's convictions and sentences are affirmed. /s/ PHILIP HALL, Judge CONCURRING: /s/ SHELDON H. WEISBERG, Presiding Judge /s/ JOHN C. GEMMILL, Judge 5

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.