STATE OF ARIZONA v. MIGUEL MEJIAS MONDESI
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. MIGUEL MEJIAS MONDESI, Appellant. No. 2 CA-CR 2017-0157 Filed December 20, 2017 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 NOT FOR PUBLICATION See Ariz.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. CR20162456001 The Honorable Paul E. Tang, Judge AFFIRMED COUNSEL Joel Feinman, Pima County Public Defender By Abigail Jensen, Assistant Public Defender, Tucson Counsel for Appellant STATE v. MONDESI Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Vásquez authored the decision of the Court, in which Chief Judge Eckerstrom and Judge Eppich concurred. V Á S Q U E Z, Presiding Judge: ¶1 After a jury trial, Miguel Mondesi was convicted of unlawful use of a means of transportation and second-degree criminal trespass. The trial court sentenced him to a four-year prison term for the first offense, and to time served for the second. ¶2 Counsel has filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530 (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, 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. Mondesi has not filed a supplemental brief. ¶3 Viewed in the light most favorable to sustaining the jury’s verdicts, see State v. Tamplin, 195 Ariz. 246, ¶ 2 (App. 1999), the evidence is sufficient to support the verdicts here. In May 2016, a police officer stopped Mondesi, who was driving a vehicle that had been reported stolen; Mondesi did not have a key to the vehicle, the ignition switch had been removed from the steering column, and a flat-head screwdriver was found next to the driver’s seat. A.R.S. §§ 13-1503(A), 13-1803(A)(1). Sufficient evidence supported the trial court’s finding that Mondesi had four previous convictions. His sentences are within the statutory range and were lawfully imposed. A.R.S. §§ 13-703(C), (J), 13-707(A), 13-1503(B), 13-1803(B). ¶4 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for fundamental, reversible error and have found none. Accordingly, we affirm Mondesi’s convictions and sentences. 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.
