STATE OF ARIZONA v. RICHARD WESLEY LONG
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. RICHARD WESLEY LONG, Appellant. No. 2 CA-CR 2020-0014 Filed October 29, 2020 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 NOT FOR PUBLICATION See Ariz.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 Pima County No. CR20162863002 The Honorable Deborah Bernini, Judge AFFIRMED COUNSEL Robert A. Kerry, Tucson Counsel for Appellant STATE v. LONG Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Staring authored the decision of the Court, in which Chief Judge Vásquez and Judge Brearcliffe concurred. S T A R I N G, Presiding Judge: ¶1 After a jury trial, Richard Long was convicted of two counts 1 of forgery. The trial court sentenced him to concurrent eight-year terms of imprisonment. Counsel has filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating he “has reviewed the entire record on appeal but has found no tenable issue to raise.” Consistent with State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, ¶ 30 (App. 1999), counsel has provided “a detailed factual and procedural history of the case, with citations to the record,” and has asked us to search the record for reversible error. Long has not filed a supplemental brief. ¶2 Viewed in the light most favorable to affirming the jury’s verdicts, see State v. Allen, 235 Ariz. 72, ¶ 2 (App. 2014), the evidence is sufficient here, see A.R.S. § 13-2002(A). In May and June 2016, Long attempted to cash two checks, one that had printed on it the address of a tool company and was issued to a business vendor, stolen from the mail, and altered to be payable to Long, and another that had been given to Long by “Danielle,” who Long admitted was not the account holder of the check. ¶3 The record also supports the trial court’s finding that Long had two historical prior felony convictions. The sentences imposed are within the statutory range. See A.R.S. §§ 13-703(C), (J), 13-2002(C). ¶4 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for reversible error and have found none. Accordingly, we affirm Long’s convictions and sentences. 1 Long was also indicted for possession of a narcotic drug and possession of drug paraphernalia, but those counts were severed before trial. After he was found guilty of the forgery counts, Long pled guilty to the drug charges. 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.
