In re Michael L.
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 MICHAEL L. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) DIVISION ONE FILED: 05/20/10 PHILIP G. URRY,CLERK BY: JT 1 CA-JV 10-0047 DEPARTMENT A MEMORANDUM DECISION (Not for Publication Ariz.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. JV-173326 The Honorable Aimee L. Anderson, Judge AFFIRMED Richard M. Romley, Maricopa County Attorney By Jeffrey W. Trudgian, Appeals Bureau Chief/ Deputy County Attorney Attorneys for Appellee Phoenix James J. Haas, Maricopa County Public Defender Phoenix By Eleanor S. Terpstra, Deputy Public Defender Attorneys for Appellant P O R T L E Y, Judge ¶1 Michael L. ( Juvenile ) appeals his adjudication and disposition. Juvenile s counsel has filed a brief in accordance with v. Anders 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, she finds no arguable ground for reversal. Counsel 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 of possession of marijuana and endangerment on April 3, 2009, both misdemeanors, and placed on standard probation. petition charging him with The State filed a delinquency five probation on February 1, 2010. counts of violating his He subsequently admitted to one of the counts pursuant to a plea agreement 2 on February 16, 2010, 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 The remaining counts were dismissed. 2 and the juvenile court again placed him on standard probation. The court affirmed the terms of its prior disposition; appointed a guardian ad psychological litem; and ordered evaluation, be that detained Juvenile for submit thirty to days, a and submit to the JETS program for four weeks after his detention. DISCUSSION ¶4 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. So far as the record reveals, Juvenile was represented by counsel at all stages of the proceedings, and statutory limits. the disposition imposed was See A.R.S. § 8-341 (Supp. 2009). within the Finding no reversible error, we affirm. CONCLUSION ¶5 After obligations the filing pertaining appeal have ended. to of this Juvenile s decision, representation counsel s in this 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 ¶6 Accordingly, we affirm the adjudication disposition. /s/ ________________________________ MAURICE PORTLEY, Presiding Judge CONCURRING: /s/ ______________________________ LAWRENCE F. WINTHROP, Judge /s/ ______________________________ MARGARET H. DOWNIE, Judge 4 and
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.
