IN RE REYNA I.
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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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 REYNA I. No. 1 CA-JV 19-0169 FILED 8-29-2019 Appeal from the Superior Court in Yuma County No. S1400JV20190009 The Honorable Kathryn Stocking-Tate, Judge AFFIRMED COUNSEL Law Office of Penny L. Higginbottom, Yuma By Penny Higginbottom Counsel for Appellant Reyna I. Yuma County Attorney’s Office, Yuma By Griselda Cordova Counsel for Appellee MEMORANDUM DECISION Judge Samuel A. Thumma delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Paul J. McMurdie and Chief Judge Peter B. Swann joined. IN RE REYNA I. Decision of the Court T H U M M A, Judge: ¶1 This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) and Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JV-117258, 163 Ariz. 484 (App. 1989). Counsel for appellant Reyna I. has advised the court that, after searching the entire record, she has found no arguable question of law and asks this court to conduct an Anders review of the record. This court has reviewed the record and has found no reversible error. Accordingly, the finding of delinquency and resulting disposition are affirmed. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY ¶2 In October 2018, when she was 11 years old, Reyna I. was found in possession of a vape pen with a usable amount of marijuana wax while at school. She was charged with possession of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia, each a class six felony. In May 2019, she admitted to an amended charge of possession of drug paraphernalia, a class one misdemeanor. After a full plea colloquy, the court accepted the admission and found her delinquent of the amended charge and dismissed the original charges. After considering a disposition report, and hearing argument, the court placed Reyna I. on supervised probation for nine months. This court has jurisdiction over Reyna I.’s timely appeal pursuant to Arizona revised Statutes sections 12-120.21(A)(1) and 8-235. DISCUSSION ¶3 This court has reviewed and considered counsel’s brief and has searched the entire record for reversible error. Searching the record and briefs reveals no reversible error. The record shows that Reyna I. was represented by counsel at all relevant stages of the proceedings. The record shows that Reyna I. knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally admitted the amended charge. From the record, all proceedings were conducted in compliance with the Arizona Rules of Procedure for Juvenile Court. The disposition imposed was authorized by statute. 2 IN RE REYNA I. Decision of the Court CONCLUSION ¶4 This court has read and considered counsel’s brief and has searched the record provided for reversible error and has found none. See JV-117258, 163 Ariz. at 488. Accordingly, the delinquency finding and disposition are affirmed. ¶5 Upon filing of this decision, counsel is directed to inform Reyna I. of the status of her appeal and of her future options. Counsel has no further obligations unless, upon review, counsel identifies an issue appropriate for submission to the Arizona Supreme Court by petition for review. See State v. Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582, 584–85 (1984). Reyna I. shall have 30 days from the date of this decision to proceed, if she desires, with a pro se motion for reconsideration or petition for review. 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.
