IN RE EDDIE S.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE. IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION ONE IN RE EDDIE S. No. 1 CA-JV 18-0172 FILED 8-14-2018 Appeal from the Superior Court in Yuma County No. S1400JV20170463 The Honorable Kathryn E. Stocking-Tate, Judge Pro Tempore AFFIRMED COUNSEL Yuma County Legal Defender’s Office, Yuma By Terri L. Capozzi Counsel for Appellant Yuma County Attorney’s Office, Yuma By Griselda Cordova Counsel for Appellee IN RE EDDIE S. Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Randall M. Howe delivered the decision of the Court, in which Judge Jennifer M. Perkins and Judge Peter B. Swann joined. H O W E, Judge: ¶1 Eddie S. appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating him from standard probation and placing him on juvenile intensive probation for nine months. This appeal is filed in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297 (1969). See In re Maricopa Cty. Juv. Action No. JV–117258, 163 Ariz. 484, 486 (App. 1989) (applying Anders review to appeals in delinquency proceedings). Counsel for Eddie has advised this Court that counsel found no arguable questions of law and asks us to search the record for fundamental error. ¶2 We view the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the juvenile court’s order. In re James P., 214 Ariz. 420, 422 ¶ 2 (App. 2007). In October 2017, the juvenile court adjudicated Eddie delinquent for possession of drug paraphernalia and placed him on standard probation. Six months later, Eddie’s probation officer petitioned to revoke probation. The probation officer alleged that between March 26 and April 10, Eddie violated his probation terms by missing 11 classes, having 4 “tardies,” and failing to call in to the random drug testing system. ¶3 At a hearing on the petition, Eddie admitted to all allegations in the petition. The court asked Eddie’s mother if she approved of Eddie admitting the allegations, and she responded that she did. When the judge asked Eddie why he had missed classes and was tardy, he responded, “I don’t know. Well, the other days, I just woke up late and I was late.” The judge then asked why he failed to call in to the drug testing system and Eddie similarly responded, “I don’t know. I just forgot[.]” Because the probation officer recommended intensive probation, the court set a disposition hearing for three weeks later. ¶4 At the disposition hearing, the probation officer stated that Eddie had continued to miss classes after the previous court hearing. Eddie admitted to missing more classes but stated that he had stopped going only after the school informed him that he would not be receiving any credit because of his absences. The court terminated Eddie from standard 2 IN RE EDDIE S. Decision of the Court probation and ordered that he be placed on juvenile intensive probation for nine months. The court also ordered that Eddie attend his high school, attend counseling, and continue to call in to the random drug testing system. The court further ordered that Eddie participate in a 32-hour community restitution program and assessed a $60 monthly supervision fee and $15 treatment fee per referral. Eddie timely appealed. ¶5 We have read and considered counsel’s brief and fully reviewed the record for reversible error, see Leon, 104 Ariz. at 300, and find none. Eddie admitted to the allegations in the petition to revoke probation. The juvenile court properly exercised its discretion to terminate Eddie’s standard probation and place him on juvenile intensive probation. Accordingly, we affirm the court’s order. AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court FILED: AA 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.
