Court of Appeals of Arizona, First Division, Department E
Not for Publication – Ariz. R.P. Juv. Ct. 103(G); ARCAP 28
Appeal from the Superior Court in Yuma County Cause No. S1400JV20100171 The Honorable Kathryn Stocking-Tate, Judge Pro Tempore.
Jon R. Smith, Yuma County Attorney Yuma By Chris Aaron Weede, Deputy County Attorney Attorneys for Appellee.
Mary Elizabeth Perez San Diego, CA Attorney for Appellant.
LAWRENCE F. WINTHROP, Presiding Judge.
¶1 Summer B. ("Juvenile") appeals the juvenile court's delinquency adjudication and disposition order placing her on intensive probation and requiring her to pay restitution. Juvenile argues that the State failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish the mens rea of intentionally or knowingly disturbing the peace by recklessly handling and discharging a deadly weapon, required to establish the charge of disorderly conduct. For the following reasons, we affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
¶2On August 12, 2012, Juvenile and three men were socializing in a motel room in Yuma. One of the men brought several guns into the room and displayed them to the others. After unloading the guns, the gun owner permitted Juvenile to look at them. He then reloaded the guns and placed them back on the motel bed before going out to his truck to smoke a cigarette. Juvenile picked up one gun and pulled the trigger. The weapon discharged, resulting in a bullet hole in the window of the small motel room.
¶3After firing the single shot, a scared Juvenile fled the motel and ran to a nearby diner. Officers from the Yuma Police Department detained the three men in the motel room and located Juvenile crying and shaking at the diner. One officer brought Juvenile back to the crime scene for questioning. After being advised of her rights pursuant to Miranda, Juvenile initially denied her involvement to the officers, stating she was in the bathroom when the gun was fired. During further questioning by two officers, however, Juvenile admitted pulling the trigger and firing the gun, although she claimed she thought the gun was unloaded. Juvenile also completed a written statement in which she admitted firing the gun, but claimed the gun owner told her the weapon was unloaded.
¶4On September 7, 2012, the State filed a delinquency petition charging Juvenile with one count of disorderly conduct with a deadly weapon, in violation of Arizona Revised Statutes ("A.R.S.") section 13-2904(A)(6) (West 2013),  and one count of criminal damage, in violation of A.R.S. § 13-1602(A)(1). On January 25, 2013, during a contested hearing, the State produced evidence of Juvenile's oral and written statements the night of the shooting, as well as evidence of the size and floor plan of the motel room and statements made by the gun owner to police officers about reloading the guns. In her defense, Juvenile claimed the man who really fired the weapon was a prohibited possessor who asked her to take the blame, scaring her into making the inculpatory statements. Juvenile further claimed she had no involvement with the shooting because she was in the bathroom at the time. The juvenile court adjudicated Juvenile delinquent on both counts. The court later entered a disposition of one year intensive probation and ordered that Juvenile pay restitution to the motel owner.
¶5Juvenile filed a timely notice of appeal. We have appellate jurisdiction pursuant to the Arizona Constitution, Article 6, Section 9, A.R.S. § 8-235(A), and Rule 103(A) of the Arizona Rules of Procedure for the Juvenile Court.
¶6On appeal, Juvenile challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to prove she intentionally or knowingly disturbed the peace by recklessly handling and discharging a deadly weapon. Specifically, Juvenile claims she thought the gun was unloaded when she pulled the trigger, and therefore lacked the requisite mens rea.
¶7When reviewing the adjudication, "we will not re-weigh the evidence, and we will only reverse on the grounds of insufficient evidence if there is a complete absence of probative facts to support the judgment or if the judgment is contrary to any substantial evidence." In re John M., 201 Ariz. 424, 426, ¶ 7, 36 P.3d 772, 774 (App. 2001). "In reviewing the juvenile court's adjudication of delinquency, we review the evidence and resolve all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to ...