In re Raylee H.
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 IN RE RAYLEE H. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1 CA-JV 09-0217 DIVISION ONE FILED: 02/18/2010 PHILIP G. URRY,CLERK BY: GH DEPARTMENT A MEMORANDUM DECISION (Not for Publication Ariz. R.P. Juv. Ct. 103(G); ARCAP 28) Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County Cause No. JV549371 The Honorable Linda A. Akers, Judge AFFIRMED Andrew P. Thomas, Maricopa County Attorney By Jeffrey W. Trudgian, Appeals Bureau Chief/ Deputy County Attorney Attorneys for Appellee Phoenix Maricopa County Public Defender s Office By Terry J. Reid, Deputy Public Defender Attorneys for Appellant Phoenix P O R T L E Y, Judge ¶1 Raylee H. ( Juvenile ) appeals his adjudication and disposition. Juvenile s counsel has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), and Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JV-117258, 163 Ariz. 484, 485-87, 788 P.2d 1235, 1236-38 (App. 1989), advising this court that after a search of the entire record on appeal, he finds no arguable ground for reversal. This court granted Juvenile an opportunity to file a supplemental brief, but he has not done so. Counsel now requests that we search the record for fundamental error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, 537, ¶ 30, 2 P.3d 89, 96 (App. 1999). ¶2 We have jurisdiction pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes ( A.R.S. ) section 8-235 (2007), and Arizona Rule of Procedure for the Juvenile Court 103. FACTS 1 ¶3 Juvenile was adjudicated delinquent on May 20, 2009, and placed on probation on June 16, 2009. The State filed a delinquency petition charging him with violating his probation on June 26, 2009. While in custody at the Southeast Juvenile Detention Facility awaiting adjudication, Juvenile punched a detention officer with a closed fist on [his] lower right lip on 1 We review the facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the adjudication. See In re John M., 201 Ariz. 424, 426, ¶ 7, 36 P.3d 772, 774 (App. 2001). 2 July 2, 2009. He subsequently admitted to violating his probation pursuant to a plea agreement on July 15, 2009, and was awarded to the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections ( ADJC ). ¶4 The State filed a second delinquency petition on July 24, 2009, in connection with the assault on the detention officer. juvenile court adjudicated Juvenile delinquent of The aggravated assault, and re-awarded him to ADJC to serve a minimum of thirty days in a locked facility. DISCUSSION ¶5 We have read and considered counsel s brief and have searched the entire record for reversible error. 163 Ariz. at 488, 788 P.2d at 1239. See JV-117258, We find none. All of the proceedings were conducted in compliance with the Arizona Rules of Procedure for the Juvenile Court. Juvenile was represented by So far as the record reveals, counsel at all stages of the proceedings, and the disposition imposed was within the statutory limits. See A.R.S. § 8-341 (Supp. 2009). Finding no reversible error, we affirm. CONCLUSION ¶6 After the filing of this decision, counsel s obligations pertaining to Juvenile s representation in this appeal have ended. Counsel need do no more than inform him of the status of the appeal and his future options. See State v. Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582, 584- 85, 684 P.2d 154, 156-57 (1984). 3 ¶7 Accordingly, we affirm the adjudication and disposition. /s/ ________________________________ MAURICE PORTLEY, Presiding Judge CONCURRING: /s/ ______________________________ LAWRENCE F. WINTHROP, Judge /s/ ______________________________ MARGARET H. DOWNIE, Judge 4
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.
