STATE OF ARIZONA v. GASTON SANTOS LLANES-DELAREY

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. GASTON SANTOS LLANES-DELAREY, Appellant. No. 2 CA-CR 2015-0041 Filed June 12, 2015 THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. NOT FOR PUBLICATION See Ariz. R. Sup. Ct. 111(c)(1); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24. Appeal from the Superior Court in Pima County No. CR20140593001 The Honorable Richard D. Nichols, Judge AFFIRMED COUNSEL Steven R. Sonenberg, Pima County Public Defender By Abigail Jensen, Assistant Public Defender, Tucson Counsel for Appellant STATE v. LLANES-DELAREY Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Chief Judge Eckerstrom authored the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Miller and Judge Espinosa concurred. E C K E R S T R O M, Chief Judge: ¶1 After a jury trial, Gaston Llanes-Delarey was convicted of aggravated robbery. The trial court suspended the imposition of sentence and placed Llanes-Delarey on an eighteen-month term of probation. 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), asserting she has reviewed the record but found no arguable issue to raise on appeal. Consistent with Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, ¶ 32, 2 P.3d at 97, she has provided “a detailed factual and procedural history of the case with citations to the record” and asks this court to search the record for error. Llanes-Delarey has not filed a supplemental brief. ¶2 Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdict, see State v. Tamplin, 195 Ariz. 246, ¶ 2, 986 P.2d 914, 914 (App. 1999), sufficient evidence supports the jury’s verdict here. In October 2013, Llanes-Delarey pushed and fought with a convenience store clerk while his companion stole a case of beer. A.R.S. §§ 13-1902(A); 13-1903(A). The term of his probation is authorized by statute and was imposed in a lawful manner. See A.R.S. §§ 13-901(A), (B); 13-902(A)(2); 13-1903(B). ¶3 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for fundamental error and found none. See State v. Fuller, 143 Ariz. 571, 575, 694 P.2d 1185, 1189 (1985) (Anders requires court to search record for fundamental error). Accordingly, we affirm Llanes-Delarey’s conviction and disposition. 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.