STATE OF ARIZONA v. ROLLIN JOHNSON

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. ROLLIN LEE JOHNSON, Appellant. No. 2 CA-CR 2018-0253 Filed May 29, 2019 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 NOT FOR PUBLICATION See Ariz.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. 31.19(e). Appeal from the Superior Court in Pinal County No. S1100CR201701407 The Honorable Kevin D. White, Judge AFFIRMED COUNSEL Michael Villarreal, Florence Counsel for Appellant STATE v. JOHNSON Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Chief Judge Eckerstrom authored the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Eppich and Judge Espinosa concurred. E C K E R S T R O M, Chief Judge: ¶1 Following a jury trial, appellant Rollin Johnson was convicted of disorderly conduct, assisting a criminal street gang, two counts of discharging a firearm at a non-residential structure, and twenty-six counts of aggravated assault, all dangerous. Ten counts of aggravated assault were dangerous crimes against children. The trial court sentenced him to enhanced, consecutive and concurrent prison terms totaling 192 years’ imprisonment. 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), stating he has reviewed the record and has found no “arguable issues on appeal.” Counsel has asked us to search the record for “fundamental or reversible error.” Johnson has not filed a supplemental brief. ¶2 Viewed in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdict, see State v. Delgado, 232 Ariz. 182, ¶ 2 (App. 2013), the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s findings of guilt, see A.R.S. §§ 13-1203(A)(1), (2), 13-1204(A)(2), 13-1211(B), 13-2321(B), 13-2904(A)(6). The evidence presented at trial showed Johnson, who had tattoos and clothing consistent with gang affiliation and had been identified as a gang member, during a fight among gang members, fired a gun multiple times toward a crowd of children and young adults standing outside a youth recreation center, hitting the building and two people, and causing the crowd to scatter in fear. We further conclude the sentences imposed are within the statutory limits. See A.R.S. §§ 13-704(A), 13-705, 13-1204(E), 13-1211(B), 13-2321(D), 13-2904(B). ¶3 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for fundamental, reversible error and have found none. Therefore, Johnson’s convictions and sentences are affirmed. 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.