STATE OF ARIZONA v. DEREK ALBERT CARPENTER
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED BY CLERK NOTICE: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND M AY 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. MAR 11 2009 COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. DEREK ALBERT CARPENTER, Appellant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2 CA-CR 2007-0287 DEPARTMENT B MEMORANDUM DECISION Not for Publication Rule 111, Rules of the Supreme Court APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PIMA COUNTY Cause No. CR-20062417 Honorable Richard S. Fields, Judge AFFIRMED Patrick C. Coppen Tucson Attorney for Appellant B R A M M E R, Judge. ¶1 A jury found Derek Carpenter guilty of unlawful flight from a pursuing law enforcement vehicle. See A.R.S. § 28-622.01. Following a hearing, the trial court found Carpenter had two historical prior felony convictions. The court sentenced him to a mitigated term of 4.5 years imprisonment, and Carpenter appealed. 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), avowing he has reviewed the entire record but has found no arguable, meritorious issues to raise on appeal.1 Carpenter has not filed a supplemental brief. Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have reviewed the record in its ¶2 entirety, and we have found no error warranting reversal. Viewed in the light most favorable to upholding the verdict, see State v. Tamplin, 195 Ariz. 246, ¶ 2, 986 P.2d 914, 914 (App. 1999), the evidence established that Carpenter led police on a high-speed chase after officers in a marked patrol vehicle attempted to stop him using the vehicle s overhead lights and siren; he eventually crashed his car in the desert and attempted to flee on foot. See § 28622.01 ( A driver of a motor vehicle who wilfully flees or attempts to elude a pursuing official law enforcement vehicle that is being operated in the manner described in [A.R.S.] § 28-624, subsection C is guilty of a class five felony. ). Substantial evidence supports his conviction, and the sentence the trial court imposed is within the statutory range authorized for the offense. Therefore, we affirm Carpenter s conviction and sentence. _______________________________________ J. WILLIAM BRAMMER, JR., Judge CONCURRING: _______________________________________ PETER J. ECKERSTROM, Presiding Judge _______________________________________ JOSEPH W. HOWARD, Judge 1 Counsel has identified several arguable issues regarding ineffective assistance of trial counsel, which we may not consider on appeal. See State v. Spreitz, 202 Ariz. 1, ¶ 9, 39 P.3d 525, 527 (2002). 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.
