STATE OF ARIZONA v. CHEREE HELEN ABBOTT

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. CHEREE HELEN ABBOTT, Appellant. No. 2 CA-CR 2016-0164 Filed October 6, 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 NOT FOR PUBLICATION See Ariz.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 Pima County No. CR20153200001 The Honorable Scott Rash, Judge AFFIRMED COUNSEL Steven R. Sonenberg, Pima County Public Defender By Sarah L. Mayhew, Assistant Public Defender, Tucson Counsel for Appellant STATE v. ABBOTT Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Vásquez authored the decision of the Court, in which Chief Judge Eckerstrom and Judge Brammer1 concurred. V Á S Q U E Z, Presiding Judge: ¶1 Following a jury trial, appellant Cheree Abbott was convicted of possession of methamphetamine and possession of drug paraphernalia. The trial court suspended the imposition of sentence and placed her on concurrent, three-year terms of probation. 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 record and has found no “arguably meritorious issue to raise on appeal.” Counsel has asked us to search the record for fundamental error. Abbott 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 a deputy found two plastic tubes, approximately four inches long, containing a usable amount of methamphetamine in the purse Abbott possessed. We further conclude the terms of probation ordered are within the statutory limit. A.R.S. §§ 13-901, 13-902, 13-3407(A)(1), (B)(1), (C), 13-3415(A). ¶3 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for fundamental, reversible error and have found none. Therefore, we affirm Abbott’s convictions and terms of probation. 1The Hon. J. William Brammer Jr., a retired judge of this court, is called back to active duty to serve on this case pursuant to orders of this court and our supreme court. 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.