State v. Joiner, 011019 AZAPP1, 1 CA-CR 18-0157
|Docket Nº:||1 CA-CR 18-0157|
|Opinion Judge:||CATANI, JUDGE.|
|Party Name:||STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. MARQUISE TYERONE JOINER, Appellant.|
|Attorney:||Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix By Vineet Mehta Shaw Counsel for Appellee Maricopa County Public Defender's Office, Phoenix By Rena P. Glitsos Counsel for Appellant|
|Judge Panel:||Judge Kent E. Cattani delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Jennifer B. Campbell and Judge Paul J. McMurdie joined.|
|Case Date:||January 10, 2019|
|Court:||Court of Appeals of Arizona|
Not for Publication - Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court
Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2017-123281-001 The Honorable Michael J. Herrod, Judge
Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix By Vineet Mehta Shaw Counsel for Appellee
Maricopa County Public Defender's Office, Phoenix By Rena P. Glitsos Counsel for Appellant
Judge Kent E. Cattani delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Jennifer B. Campbell and Judge Paul J. McMurdie joined.
¶1 Marquise Tyerone Joiner appeals his conviction and sentence for possession or use of dangerous drugs. For reasons that follow, we affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
¶2 Joiner was arrested in connection with an unrelated matter and was transported to a police station and placed in a holding cell by himself. Meanwhile, an officer inspected the room in the station where Joiner would be searched for items of contraband not allowed in the jail. After determining the room was empty, the officer escorted Joiner into the room to begin the search. During the search, the officer found a plastic bag containing methamphetamine next to Joiner's foot.
¶3 A jury found Joiner guilty of possession of dangerous drugs, and the court sentenced him to 10 years' imprisonment. Joiner timely appealed his conviction and sentence, and we have jurisdiction under Arizona Revised Statutes ("A.R.S.") § 13-4033(A).
¶4 To find Joiner guilty of possession of dangerous drugs, the State was required to prove that he knowingly possessed methamphetamine. A.R.S. §§ 13-3407(A)(1), -3401(6). Joiner argues that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to establish the elements of possession and knowledge. We review the sufficiency of evidence de novo, assessing whether the record shows substantial evidence from which a reasonable trier of fact could have found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. West, 226...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP