State v. Garcia

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 ) ) ) Appellee, ) ) v. ) ) ) GEORGE N. GARCIA, ) ) Appellant. ) _____________________________ ) 1 CA-CR 10-0334 STATE OF ARIZONA, DEPARTMENT A MEMORANDUM DECISION (Not for Publication Rule 111, Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court) DIVISION ONE FILED: 06/14/2011 RUTH A. WILLINGHAM, CLERK BY: DLL Appeal from the Superior Court of Maricopa County Cause No. CR2009-154563-001 DT The Honorable Susan M. Brnovich, Judge AFFIRMED Thomas C. Horne, Attorney General By Kent E. Cattani, Chief Counsel, Criminal Appeals and Capital Litigation Section Attorneys for Appellee Phoenix James J. Haas, Maricopa County Public Defender By Joel M. Glynn, Deputy Public Defender Attorneys for Appellant Phoenix T H O M P S O N, Judge ¶1 This case comes to us as an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297, 451 P.2d (defendant) 878 has (1969). advised Counsel us that, for N. Garcia searching after George the entire record, he has been unable to discover any arguable questions of law and has filed a brief requesting that this court conduct an Anders review of the record. Defendant has been afforded an opportunity to file a supplemental brief in propria persona, and he has not done so. ¶2 Our obligation reversible error. is to review the 289, record for We review the facts in the light most sustaining the conviction reasonable inferences against defendant. Ariz. entire State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, 537, ¶ 30, 2 P.3d 89, 96 (App. 1999). favorable to 293, 778 P.2d 1185, and resolve all State v. Guerra, 161 1189 (1989). Finding no reversible error, we affirm. ¶3 In unlawfully August 2009, entered personal property. M.T. s defendant residence and and three began accomplices taking M.T. s When M.T. tried to stop them, defendant and another accomplice began beating M.T. with an aluminum baseball bat. After accomplices apartment. taking left M.T. s Having statement, police apartment, and M.T. s residence reported knocked upon defendant and two personal to on and the the seeing property, scene door M.T. s accomplices. ran of to defendant a and and neighboring taken M.T. s the neighboring property, apprehended Police escorted M.T. to the 2 neighboring apartment, where M.T. identified his stolen property and his attackers. When asked for his name and date of birth, defendant gave police his brother s name and date of birth. ¶4 Defendant was charged with one count of armed robbery, a class 2 dangerous felony, one count of aggravated assault, a class 3 dangerous felony, one count of burglary in the first degree, a class reporting to misdemeanor. trial court 2 law dangerous felony, enforcement and agency, a one count class 1 of false dangerous A jury convicted defendant of all counts. sentenced defendant to mitigated sentences The of fourteen years in prison for count one, ten years in prison for count two, and fourteen years in prison for count three, with all sentences to be served concurrently. Defendant received 245 days of presentence incarceration credit. ¶5 We have read and considered counsel s brief and have searched the entire record for reversible error. Ariz. at 300, 451 P.2d at 881. See Leon, 104 We find no reversible error pertaining to these claims or otherwise. All of the proceedings were conducted in compliance with the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure. adequately So far represented as the by record counsel reveals, at all defendant stages of was the proceedings, and the sentence imposed was within the statutory limits. Pursuant to State v. Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582, 584-85, 684 P.2d 154, 156-57 (1984), defendant s counsel s obligations 3 in this appeal are at an end. Defendant has thirty days from the date of this decision in which to proceed, if he so desires, with an in propria persona motion for reconsideration or petition for review. ¶6 We affirm the convictions and sentences. /s/ _________________________________ JON W. THOMPSON, Judge CONCURRING: /s/ ___________________________________ DIANE M. JOHNSEN, Presiding 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.