STATE OF ARIZONA v. PAUL HARTMAN

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 FILED BY CLERK MAR 23 2011 COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. PAUL HARTMAN, Appellant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2 CA-CR 2010-0256 DEPARTMENT A MEMORANDUM DECISION Not for Publication Rule 111, Rules of the Supreme Court APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PIMA COUNTY Cause No. CR20090904001 Honorable Terry L Chandler, Judge AFFIRMED Robert J. Hirsh, Pima County Public Defender By Lisa M. Hise Tucson Attorneys for Appellant B R A M M E R, Presiding Judge. ¶1 Following a jury trial, appellant Paul Hartman was convicted of continuous sexual abuse of a child. The trial court imposed a minimum, thirteen-year prison term. Counsel has filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, 2 P.3d 89 (App. 1999), stating she has reviewed the entire record and has found no meritorious issues to raise on appeal. Counsel has asked us to search the record for error. Hartman has not filed a supplemental brief. ¶2 Viewed in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdict, the evidence was sufficient to support the jury s finding of guilt. See State v. Tamplin, 195 Ariz. 246, ¶ 2, 986 P.2d 914, 914 (App. 1999). The evidence presented at trial showed Hartman had engaged in multiple acts of sexual contact with his step-sister from the time she was under seven years old to when she was eight years old, including oral and anal sex and genital-to-genital contact. ¶3 Our examination of the record, made pursuant to our obligation under Anders, discloses no fundamental or reversible error and no arguable issue warranting further appellate review. Therefore, we affirm Hartman s conviction and sentence. /s/ J. William Brammer, Jr. J. WILLIAM BRAMMER, JR., Presiding Judge CONCURRING: /s/ Joseph W. Howard JOSEPH W. HOWARD, Chief Judge /s/ Philip G. Espinosa PHILIP G. ESPINOSA, Judge 2

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.