Not For Publication See Ariz. R. Sup. Ct. 111(c); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24
Appeal from the Superior Court in Pinal County No. S1100CR201201230 The Honorable Boyd T. Johnson, Judge
Flores & Clark, LLC, Globe By Daisy Flores Counsel for Appellant
Judge Espinosa authored the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Kelly and Judge Eckerstrom concurred.
¶1 Malcolm Rubio was convicted after a jury trial of public sexual indecency to a minor under the age of fifteen and two counts of public sexual indecency. The trial court sentenced him to a maximum, enhanced, three-year prison term for public sexual indecency to a minor and to time served on the remaining counts. Counsel has filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, 2 P.3d 89 (App. 1999), asserting she has reviewed the record but found no arguable issue to raise on appeal. Consistent with Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, ¶ 32, 2 P.3d at 97, she has provided "a detailed factual and procedural history of the case with citations to the record" and asks this court to search the record for error. Rubio has not filed a supplemental brief.
¶2 Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdicts, see State v. Tamplin, 195 Ariz. 246, ¶ 2, 986 P.2d 914, 914 (App. 1999), there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's findings. Rubio was seen masturbating at a public pool by at least three individuals, one of whom was a minor under the age of fifteen. See A.R.S. §§ 13-1401(2), 13-1403(A)(1), (B). And Rubio's sentences were properly imposed and did not exceed the legal statutory limit. A.R.S. §§ 13-701, 13-703, 13-1403(C).
¶3 Pursuant to our obligation under Anders, we have searched the record for fundamental, reversible error and found none. See State v. Fuller, 143 Ariz. 571, 575, 694 P.2d 1185, 1189 (1985) (Anders requires court to search record for fundamental ...