STATE OF ARIZONA v. AMOS WESTLEY WILSON

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 FILED BY CLERK JUL 23 2010 COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. AMOS WESTLEY WILSON, Appellant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2 CA-CR 2009-0348 DEPARTMENT A MEMORANDUM DECISION Not for Publication Rule 111, Rules of the Supreme Court APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PIMA COUNTY Cause No. CR20084307 Honorable Charles S. Sabalos, Judge AFFIRMED Wanda K. Day Tucson Attorney for Appellant H O W A R D, Chief Judge. ¶1 Following a two-day jury trial, appellant Amos Westley Wilson was convicted of aggravated driving under the influence of an intoxicant while his license was suspended, revoked, or restricted and aggravated driving with an alcohol concentration of .08 or more while his license was suspended, revoked, or restricted, both class four felonies. The trial court found Wilson had three historical prior felony convictions and sentenced him to concurrent, presumptive prison terms of ten years, with credit for thirtysix days served. Counsel has filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297, 451 P.2d 878 (1969), and State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, 2 P.3d 89 (App. 1999), stating she has reviewed the record thoroughly and has found no arguable issues to raise on appeal. Counsel has asked us to search the record for fundamental error. Wilson has not filed a supplemental brief. ¶2 Viewed in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdicts, State v. Tamplin, 195 Ariz. 246, ¶ 2, 986 P.2d 914, 914 (App. 1999), the evidence was sufficient to support the jury s findings of guilt. In addition, the sentences are within the statutory limits. Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for fundamental, reversible error and have found none. Therefore, we affirm Wilson s convictions and the sentences imposed. /s/ Joseph W. Howard JOSEPH W. HOWARD, Chief Judge CONCURRING: /s/ J. William Brammer, Jr. J. WILLIAM BRAMMER, JR., Presiding Judge /s/ Philip G. Espinosa PHILIP G. ESPINOSA, Judge 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.