STATE OF ARIZONA v. JAMES DONALD BLACK

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. JAMES DONALD BLACK, Appellant. No. 2 CA-CR 2016-0074 Filed August 24, 2016 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 NOT FOR PUBLICATION See Ariz.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. S1000CR201501608 The Honorable Kevin D. White, Judge AFFIRMED COUNSEL The Stavris Law Firm, PLLC, Scottsdale By Christopher Stavris Counsel for Appellant STATE v. BLACK Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Chief Judge Eckerstrom authored the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Vásquez and Judge Miller concurred. E C K E R S T R O M, Chief Judge: ¶1 After a jury trial, James Black was convicted of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument, a dangerous offense. The jury additionally found, as aggravating factors, that Black had been on release from custody for a felony charge at the time of his offense and that he had caused physical, emotional, or financial harm to the victim. The trial court sentenced him to an aggravated, ten-year prison term. ¶2 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), asserting he has reviewed the record but found no arguable issue to raise on appeal. Consistent with Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, ¶ 32, 2 P.3d at 97, he 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 error. Black has not filed a supplemental brief. ¶3 Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the jury’s verdicts, see State v. Tamplin, 195 Ariz. 246, ¶ 2, 986 P.2d 914, 914 (App. 1999), sufficient evidence supports them here. In May 2015, Black threw a cup of bleach into the victim’s face, causing temporary blindness, burns, and significant pain, as well as causing approximately $3,000 in damage to the victim’s wheelchair. A.R.S. §§ 13-105(12), (13); 13-1203(A)(1); 13-1204(A)(2); see also State v. Larin, 233 Ariz. 202, ¶ 38, 310 P.3d 990, 1000 (App. 2013) (if offense inherently dangerous, jury determination of dangerousness not required). And the evidence shows Black was on release pending 2 STATE v. BLACK Decision of the Court unrelated felony charges. His sentence is within the statutory range and was properly imposed. A.R.S. §§ 13-704(A); 13-1204(D). ¶4 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for fundamental error and found none. See State v. Fuller, 143 Ariz. 571, 575, 694 P.2d 1185, 1189 (1985). We therefore affirm Black’s conviction and sentence. 3

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.