STATE OF ARIZONA v. ALEJANDRO MIGUEL GIBSON

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 DEC 17 2010 COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION TWO THE STATE OF ARIZONA Appellee, v. ALEJANDRO MIGUEL GIBSON, Appellant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2 CA-CR 2010-0068 DEPARTMENT A MEMORANDUM DECISION Not for Publication Rule 111, Rules of the Supreme Court APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PIMA COUNTY Cause No. CR20093100001 Honorable John S. Leonardo, Judge AFFIRMED Robert J. Hirsh, Pima County Public Defender By Rebecca A. McLean Tucson Attorneys for Appellant H O W A R D, Chief Judge. ¶1 Following a two-day jury trial, Alejandro Gibson was convicted of second- degree burglary, a class three felony, and theft by control, a class four felony, committed in January 2007. See A.R.S. §§ 13-1507, 13-1802(A)(1), (G). The trial court suspended the imposition of sentences and imposed concurrent, three-year terms of probation. 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 meritorious issues to raise on appeal. She asks this court to search the record for fundamental error. Gibson has not filed a supplemental brief. ¶2 Viewed in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdicts, the evidence was sufficient to support the jury s findings of guilt. See State v. Tamplin, 195 Ariz. 246, ¶ 2, 986 P.2d 914, 914 (App. 1999). And, the terms of probation are authorized by law. In summary, one of the victims, S., arrived home and discovered his bedroom window had been broken. S. s mother, who also lived in the home, testified she then had discovered several items were missing and had seen a footprint, and may have seen drops of blood, in the hallway near S. s bedroom. Police found a bloody towel at the scene; tests revealed that Gibson s known deoxyribonucleic acid matched the blood on the towel. ¶3 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for fundamental, reversible error and have found none. Therefore, we affirm Gibson s convictions and the probationary terms 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.