STATE OF ARIZONA v. CHARLOTTE L. BURTON (pdf)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. CHARLOTTE L. BURTON, Appellant. No. 2 CA-CR 2021-0117 Filed July 8, 2022 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 NOT FOR PUBLICATION See Ariz.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. S1100CR202100064 The Honorable Christopher J. O’Neil, Judge AFFIRMED COUNSEL Weagant Law Offices PLC, Florence By Megan K. Weagant Counsel for Appellant STATE v. BURTON Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Vice Chief Judge Staring authored the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Eppich and Judge Brearcliffe concurred. S T A R I N G, Vice Chief Judge: ¶1 After a jury trial, Charlotte Burton was found guilty of possession of a dangerous drug, resisting arrest, and possession of drug paraphernalia. The trial court suspended the imposition of sentence and placed Burton on concurrent three-year terms of probation. ¶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), stating she has reviewed the record but found no “non-frivolous issue to raise on appeal” and asking this court to review the record for error. Burton 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 here, see A.R.S. §§ 13-2508(A)(2), 13-3407(A)(1), 13-3415(A). In January 2021, a deputy sheriff sought to arrest Burton on an outstanding warrant, but she backed away from the deputy, refused to comply with his commands, and pulled away from him when he attempted “to put her on the ground”; a small baggie of methamphetamine and a syringe containing methamphetamine were found in her backpack. The probation terms were lawfully imposed. See A.R.S. §§ 13-901(A), 13-902(A)(3), (4), 13-2508(B), 13-3407(B), (C), 13-3415(A). ¶4 We have searched the record for reversible error and found none. Accordingly, we affirm Burton’s convictions and the trial court’s 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.