STATE OF ARIZONA v. DAWN MARIE SERVANT (pdf)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION TWO THE STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. DAWN MARIE SERVANT, Appellant. No. 2 CA-CR 2022-0027 Filed September 13, 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 NOT FOR PUBLICATION See Ariz.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 Gila County No. S0400CR202000324 The Honorable Bryan B. Chambers, Judge AFFIRMED COUNSEL Emily Danies, Tucson Counsel for Appellant STATE v. SERVANT Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Judge Brearcliffe authored the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Eppich and Vice Chief Judge Staring concurred. B R E A R C L I F F E, Judge: ¶1 Following a jury trial, appellant Dawn Servant was convicted of first-degree hindering prosecution. The trial court suspended the imposition of sentence and placed her on an eighteen-month term of probation. 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 and has found no “arguable question of law” to raise on appeal. Counsel has asked us to search the record for fundamental error. Servant 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 finding of guilt, see A.R.S. §§ 13-2510, 13-2512(A). The evidence presented at trial showed that when officers arrived at her home looking for a suspect, Servant told them he was not there, despite knowing that he was hiding behind a wall in the home. We further conclude the term of probation is within the statutory limit. See A.R.S. §§ 13-902(A)(4), 13-2512(B). ¶3 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for fundamental, reversible error and have found none. Therefore, Servant’s conviction and term of probation 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.