State v. Varela, 052820 AZAPP1, 1 CA-CR 18-0492

Docket Nº:1 CA-CR 18-0492
Opinion Judge:WEINZWEIG, Judge:
Party Name:STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. JOSUE ARRATIA VARELA, Appellant.
Attorney:Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix By Michael O'Toole Counsel for Appellee The Susser Law Firm, PLLC, Chandler By Adam M. Susser Counsel for Appellant
Judge Panel:Judge David D. Weinzweig delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Randall M. Howe and Judge David B. Gass joined.
Case Date:May 28, 2020
Court:Court of Appeals of Arizona
 
FREE EXCERPT

STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee,

v.

JOSUE ARRATIA VARELA, Appellant.

No. 1 CA-CR 18-0492

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Not for Publication - Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court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. CR2016-134168-001 The Honorable David V. Seyer, Judge Pro Tempore

Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix By Michael O'Toole Counsel for Appellee

The Susser Law Firm, PLLC, Chandler By Adam M. Susser Counsel for Appellant

Judge David D. Weinzweig delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Randall M. Howe and Judge David B. Gass joined.

MEMORANDUM DECISION

WEINZWEIG, Judge:

¶1 Josue Arratia Varela ("Varela") appeals his convictions and sentences for two counts of aggravated driving under the influence. After searching the record and finding no arguable, non-frivolous question of law, Varela's counsel filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297 (1969), asking this court to search the record for fundamental error. Varela had the opportunity to file a supplemental brief but did not. We affirm Varela's convictions and sentences after reviewing the record.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

¶2 Varela was traveling 81 miles per hour in a 65 mile per hour zone. When police pulled him over, Varela had bloodshot eyes, droopy eyelids, slowed speech and delayed reactions. His driver's license had been suspended. He showed signs of impairment on three field sobriety tests and was arrested for driving under the influence. He consented to have his blood drawn. A forensic toxicologist later determined that Varela had Alprazolam in his blood, a "dangerous drug" under A.R.S. § 13-3401(6)(d)(ii).

¶3 Varela was charged with two counts of aggravated driving under the influence under A.R.S § 12-1383(A)(1) because his license was suspended, he was impaired to the slightest degree and had Alprazolam in his system. He waived his right to a preliminary hearing and pleaded not guilty. A jury trial was held. Varela stipulated that his driver's license had been suspended. The arresting officer and forensic toxicologist testified. Varela did not testify or present any evidence.

¶4 The jury convicted Varela on both counts of aggravated driving under the influence. At the sentencing hearing, Varela admitted to a prior non-dangerous felony...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP