State v. Hickman, 052820 AZAPP1, 1 CA-CR 19-0261

Docket Nº:1 CA-CR 19-0261
Opinion Judge:CAMPBELL, Judge:
Party Name:STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. MICHAEL SCOTT HICKMAN, Appellant.
Attorney:Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix By Andrew Reilly Counsel for Appellee Maricopa County Public Defender's Office, Phoenix By Aaron J. Moskowitz Counsel for Appellant
Judge Panel:Judge Jennifer B. Campbell delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Paul J. McMurdie and Judge Kent E. Cattani joined.
Case Date:May 28, 2020
Court:Court of Appeals of Arizona
 
FREE EXCERPT

STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee,

v.

MICHAEL SCOTT HICKMAN, Appellant.

No. 1 CA-CR 19-0261

Court of Appeals of Arizona, First Division

May 28, 2020

Not for Publication - Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court

Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR 2018-111409-001 The Honorable Michael J. Herrod, Judge

Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix By Andrew Reilly Counsel for Appellee

Maricopa County Public Defender's Office, Phoenix By Aaron J. Moskowitz Counsel for Appellant

Judge Jennifer B. Campbell delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Paul J. McMurdie and Judge Kent E. Cattani joined.

MEMORANDUM DECISION

CAMPBELL, Judge:

¶1 Michael Hickman appeals his convictions and sentences for identity theft, credit card theft, and possession of drug paraphernalia. For the following reasons, we affirm.

BACKGROUND1

¶2 Receiving a dispatch report concerning a man "yelling" and "scaring people" at a shopping center, a patrol officer drove to the location and spotted a man matching the subject's description-Hickman. As the officer approached, Hickman explained, without prompting, that he had been arguing over the phone with his girlfriend. Although Hickman stated he was "under control" and leaving shortly, the officer asked him to provide identification. Hickman complied. Before relaying the information to dispatch for a warrants check, the officer asked Hickman whether he had any weapons, which he denied.

¶3 Moments later, a second patrol vehicle arrived at the scene. While the second officer spoke with Hickman, the first officer provided Hickman's information to dispatch. The second officer instructed Hickman to remove his hands from his pockets, and the first officer asked whether Hickman had anything illegal on his person. Initially, Hickman demurred, expressing frustration that he "could potentially get in trouble" and stating he "want[ed] to go." The officer repeated the question. Hickman responded, "It's a pipe, dude, it's a pipe." The officer asked whether it was a "meth pipe," and Hickman answered, "yes."

¶4 At that point, the officer stated he was going to place Hickman in handcuffs, search his person, and remove the pipe. In response, Hickman pulled the pipe from his jacket pocket, stating, "just take the pipe." After placing the pipe with Hickman's other belongings, the officer began searching Hickman's person. While searching, the officer received a communication from dispatch, prompting Hickman to declare, "see no warrants, I'm good." The officer responded, "they're looking still," and again provided dispatch with Hickman's identifying information. When dispatch again asked for Hickman's identifying information, the officer questioned whether the identification card Hickman provided was "real."

¶5 The officer shifted his search to Hickman's belongings, prompting...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP