Valdez v. State
Decision Date | 23 February 1937 |
Docket Number | Criminal 853 |
Citation | 49 Ariz. 115,65 P.2d 29 |
Parties | ERNEST VALDEZ, Appellant, v. STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent |
Court | Arizona Supreme Court |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the County of Yavapai. Richard Lamson, Judge. Judgment affirmed.
Mr John A. McGuire, for Appellant.
Mr. Joe Conway, Attorney General, and Mr. Albert M. Garcia, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.
This is an appeal by Ernest Valdez, hereinafter called plaintiff from a verdict and judgment in the superior court of Yavapai county, finding him guilty of burglary and sentencing him to imprisonment in the penitentiary. The case has been before us once previously, State v. Valdez, 48 Ariz 145, 59 P.2d 328, on an appeal by the state. We dismissed this appeal and remanded the case for further proceedings, as will appear by the opinion in that case. The trial court, in accordance with our views expressed therein, resentenced the defendant, and he has in turn appealed. Many of the questions raised by this appeal were, in effect, determined by us in State v. Valdez, supra, but there are a few questions which require consideration. The facts of the case appear to be as follows:
Defendant was arrested on December 16, 1935, and taken before the police magistrate in Jerome on the following day. An ordinary complaint charging him with burglary was filed, which contained no reference to any previous conviction. He waived a preliminary hearing, and was bound over to the superior court, the commitment being as follows:
"It appearing to me that the crime of felony, to wit: burglary has been committed on or about the 14th day of December, 1935, at the Town of Jerome, County of Yavapai, State of Arizona, and that there is sufficient cause to believe the defendant Ernest Valdez, guilty thereof, I order that he be held to answer the same."
Thereafter an information was filed by the county attorney, the charging part of which reads as follows:
The defendant was tried on this information before a jury, and during the course of the trial he was asked while on the stand,
to which he answered, "Yes sir."
The jury returned a verdict finding the defendant guilty of burglary in the first degree, and he was sentenced to serve from three to five years in the penitentiary.
It was the contention of the state that this sentence was void under sections 4898 and 4899, Revised Code of 1928, as being less than the minimum required by the sections, and its appeal was based on this theory. These sections read as follows:
We held that the state was correct in its contention, but that appeal was not the proper method of enforcing the law, but rather an application to the lower court to render a proper judgment and sentence, and the case was remanded for that purpose. Thereafter the court sentenced the defendant to serve not less than ten nor more than twelve years in the penitentiary, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Hurley
...penalty for persistent offenders do not create a new, separate, distinct, independent or substantive offense); Valdez v. State, 49 Ariz. 115, 120, 65 P.2d 29, 30-31 (1937) (merely sentence-enhancement provisions) with State v. Ross, 107 Ariz. 240, 243, 485 P.2d 810, 813 (1971) (prior convic......
-
State v. Robinson
...kill the deceased. 2 State v. Betts, 71 Ariz. 362, 227 P.2d 749. See also State v. Folk, 78 Ariz. 205, 277 P.2d 1016; Valdez v. State of Arizona, 49 Ariz. 115, 65 P.2d 29. The trial Court properly instructed the jury as to the law involved in this The granting or denying of a motion for a n......
-
State v. Ferreira
...which may be imposed by statute for the subsequent offense. State v. Scanlon, 104 Ariz. 187, 450 P.2d 377 (1969); Valdez v. State, 49 Ariz. 115, 65 P.2d 29 (1937). Here, the armed burglary, burglary first degree, and armed rape counts all carry a penalty of at least five years to life, A.R.......
-
State v. Walsh
... ... to ten is a sentence of "not less than three years" ... within the meaning of an habitual criminal statute. They are, ... however, persuasive ... The ... position of the defendant finds support in certain statements ... made in Valdez v. State, 49 Ariz. 115, 65 ... P.2d 29, 31, wherein the court construed a statute which ... provided for a heavier punishment upon the showing of prior ... convictions of a crime punishable by "imprisonment * * * ... for any term exceeding five years." The defendant ... contended that a crime ... ...