State v. Lagunas ( 2021 )


Menu:
  •                      NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.
    UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL
    AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.
    IN THE
    ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS
    DIVISION ONE
    STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee,
    v.
    MOISES HERNANDEZ LAGUNAS, Appellant.
    No. 1 CA-CR 20-0392
    FILED 4-8-2021
    Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
    No. CR2019-006272-001
    The Honorable Timothy J. Ryan, Judge
    AFFIRMED
    COUNSEL
    Arizona Attorney General’s Office, Phoenix
    By Linley Wilson
    Counsel for Appellee
    KBUNITED, LLC, Phoenix
    By Kerrie M. Nelson
    Counsel for Appellant
    STATE v. LAGUNAS
    Decision of the Court
    MEMORANDUM DECISION
    Judge Samuel A. Thumma delivered the decision of the Court, in which
    Presiding Judge Kent E. Cattani and Judge Brian Y. Furuya joined.
    T H U M M A, Judge:
    ¶1             This is an appeal under Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    , 744
    (1967) and State v. Leon, 
    104 Ariz. 297
    , 300 (1969). Counsel for defendant
    Moises Hernandez Lagunas advised the court that, after searching the
    entire record, no arguable question of law was identified and asks this court
    to conduct an Anders review of the record. Lagunas was given the
    opportunity to file a supplemental brief pro se but has not done so. This
    court has reviewed the record and has found no reversible error. Leon, 
    104 Ariz. at 300
    ; State v. Clark, 
    196 Ariz. 530
    , 537 ¶ 30 (App. 1999). Accordingly,
    Lagunas’ convictions and resulting sentences are affirmed.
    FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
    ¶2            In February 2020, a jury found Lagunas guilty of one count of
    attempted second-degree murder, a Class 2 felony (Count 1); one count of
    kidnapping, a Class 2 felony (Count 4); and three counts of aggravated
    assault, Class 3 felonies (Counts 2, 3, and 5). The jury also found the State
    had proven many alleged aggravators. The offenses occurred in March 2013
    in Maricopa County.
    ¶3           The superior court sentenced Lagunas to concurrent prison
    terms on Counts 1 through 4, and a consecutive prison term on Count 5.
    Lagunas appropriately received 142 days’ presentence incarceration credit
    on Counts 1 through 4. This court has jurisdiction over Lagunas’ timely
    appeal pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) §§ 12-120.21(A)(1), 13-
    4031, and -4033(A)(1).
    2
    STATE v. LAGUNAS
    Decision of the Court
    DISCUSSION
    ¶4              The record shows that Lagunas was represented by counsel
    at all critical stages of the proceedings. The record contains substantial
    evidence supporting the convictions. The prison sentences imposed are
    within statutory limits. The awards of presentence incarceration credit were
    accurate. And in all other respects, from the record presented, all
    proceedings were conducted in compliance with the Arizona Rules of
    Criminal Procedure.
    CONCLUSION
    ¶5           This court has read and considered counsel’s brief, has
    searched the record provided for reversible error and has found none.
    Accordingly, Lagunas’ convictions and resulting sentences are affirmed.
    ¶6            Upon the filing of this decision, defense counsel is directed to
    inform Lagunas of the status of the appeal and of his future options.
    Counsel has no further obligations unless, upon review, she identifies an
    issue appropriate for submission to the Arizona Supreme Court by petition
    for review. See State v. Shattuck, 
    140 Ariz. 582
    , 584–85 (1984). Lagunas has
    30 days from the date of this decision to proceed, if he desires, with a pro
    se motion for reconsideration or petition for review.
    AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court
    FILED: AA
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 1 CA-CR 20-0392

Filed Date: 4/8/2021

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/8/2021