State v. Razo
| Decision Date | 21 October 1999 |
| Docket Number | No. 2 CA-CR 99-0017-PR.,2 CA-CR 99-0017-PR. |
| Citation | 195 Ariz. 393,988 P.2d 1119 |
| Parties | The STATE of Arizona, Respondent, v. Kevin Charles RAZO, Petitioner. |
| Court | Arizona Court of Appeals |
Susan A. Kettlewell, Pima County Public Defender By Brian X. Metcalf, Tucson, Attorneys for Petitioner.
¶ 1 Charged by indictment with eighteen felony counts, petitioner pled guilty to aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, a dangerous, class three felony, and drive-by shooting, a dangerous, class two felony. He was sentenced to concurrent, aggravated terms of imprisonment of eight and 11.5 years, to be followed by a term of community supervision of one day for every seven days of the sentences imposed. Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 32, Ariz. R.Crim. P., 17 A.R.S., contending that A.R.S. § 13-603(J) requires the period of community supervision to be expressed in terms of months or years rather than days. This petition for review followed the trial court's summary dismissal of the petition. We review a trial court's denial of post-conviction relief only for an abuse of discretion. State v. Schrock, 149 Ariz. 433, 719 P.2d 1049 (1986).
¶ 2 Section 13-603(I) and (J) provide:
I. If a person is convicted of a felony offense and the court sentences the person to a term of imprisonment, the court at the time of sentencing shall impose on the convicted person a term of community supervision. The term of community supervision shall be served consecutively to the actual period of imprisonment if the person signs and agrees to abide by conditions of supervision established by the state department of corrections. Except pursuant to subsection J, the term of community supervision imposed by the court shall be for a period equal to one day for every seven days of the sentence or sentences imposed.
J. The court shall round the term of community supervision imposed pursuant to subsection I. A term of community supervision shall only be given in increments of years or months. In calculating the term of community supervision, all fractions of the month may be increased or decreased to the nearest month, except for a class 5 or 6 felony which shall not be less than one month.
¶ 3 Our objective in interpreting a statute is to give effect to the legislative intent behind the statute and, when possible, to harmonize all its sections. Epstein v. Industrial Comm'n, 154 Ariz. 189, 741 P.2d 322 (App.1987). "When a statute's words do not disclose legislative intent, the court must read the statute as a whole, and give meaningful operation to all of its provisions." Wyatt v. Wehmueller, 167 Ariz. 281, 284, 806 P.2d 870, 873 (199...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Rodriguez
...a statute is to give effect to the legislative intent behind the statute and, when possible, to harmonize all its sections." State v. Razo, 195 Ariz. 393, ¶ 3, 988 P.2d 1119, ¶ 3 (App.1999); see also State v. Wagstaff, 164 Ariz. 485, 491, 794 P.2d 118, 124 (1990) ("We strive to construe a s......
-
Flowers-Carter v. Braun Corp.
...their options. In any event, when possible, a court should interpret a statute's sections harmoniously. State v. Razo , 195 Ariz. 393, 988 P.2d 1119, 1120 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999) ("Our objective in interpreting a statute is to give effect to the legislative intent behind the statute and, when......
-
Farm Bureau Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Hewlett-Packard Co.
...mail on a statutory agent in another state, and the Court will not read the two rules as being in conflict. See State v. Razo, 988 P.2d 1119, 1120 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999) ("We must endeavor . . . to construe apparently conflicting statutes in a way that gives effect to all."). The Court finds......
-
Coppock v. Mundell
...intent behind the statute," and "to give [the words of the statute] a fair and sensible meaning and to avoid absurd results." State v. Razo, 195 Ariz. 393, 394, ¶ 3, 988 P.2d 1119, 1120 (App. 1999); Walgreen Ariz. Drug Co. v. Ariz. Dep't of Revenue, 209 Ariz. 71, 73, ¶ 12, 97 P.3d 896, 898 ......