STATE OF ARIZONA v. RAMON GUILLERMO TRUJILLO

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. RAMON GUILLERMO TRUJILLO, Appellant. No. 2 CA-CR 2015-0080 Filed November 24, 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 NOT FOR PUBLICATION See Ariz.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. CR20132668001 The Honorable Howard Fell, Judge Pro Tempore AFFIRMED COUNSEL Steven R. Sonenberg, Pima County Public Defender By Katherine A. Estavillo, Assistant Public Defender, Tucson Counsel for Appellant STATE v. TRUJILLO Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Vásquez authored the decision of the Court, in which Judge Howard and Judge Kelly1 concurred. V Á S Q U E Z, Presiding Judge: ¶1 After a jury trial, Ramon Trujillo was convicted of sexual assault and kidnapping. The trial court sentenced him to concurrent prison terms, the longer of which is seven years. ¶2 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 “arguably meritorious 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. Trujillo has not filed a supplemental brief. ¶3 Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdicts, see State v. Tamplin, 195 Ariz. 246, ¶ 2, 986 P.2d 914, 914 (App. 1999), sufficient evidence supports the jury’s verdicts here. In August 2000, Trujillo grabbed the victim as she was walking alone and pushed her to the ground; he then penetrated her vagina with his penis. See A.R.S. §§ 13-1304(A)(3); 13-1401(A)(4), (7); 13-1406(A). Trujillo’s prison terms were within the statutory limits and imposed properly. See A.R.S. §§ 13-702(D), 13-1304(B), 131406(B). 1The Hon. Virginia C. Kelly, a retired judge of this court, is called back to active duty to serve on this case pursuant to orders of this court and our supreme court. 2 STATE v. TRUJILLO Decision of the Court ¶4 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for fundamental error and have 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 Trujillo’s convictions and sentences. 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.