Not for Publication – Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court
Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. CR2013-002141-001 The Honorable William L. Brotherton, Jr., Judge
Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix By David A. Simpson Counsel for Appellee
The Law Office of Stephen L. Crawford, Phoenix By Stephen L. Crawford Counsel for Appellant
Judge Patricia A. Orozco delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Margaret H. Downie and Judge Maurice Portley joined.
¶1 Robert Jeffrey Morrison appeals from his convictions and resulting sentences for two counts of shoplifting with an artifice or device, both class 4 felonies. For the following reasons, we affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
¶2 On November 25, 2012, Morrison entered a cosmetics and fragrance store (Ulta) in Paradise Valley. The store manager, J.F., became suspicious that Morrison might try to shoplift, so she asked an employee to speak to Morrison in the fragrance department and another employee to watch the store's live security footage. J.F. was then informed that Morrison had placed two bottles of fragrances in his bag.
¶3 J.F. waited at the store's exit and asked Morrison to return the fragrances as he approached her. Morrison returned the fragrances and pushed his way past J.F. to exit the store.
¶4 Officer Montoya was called to the store and detained Morrison as he walked out of the store. After speaking with J.F. and conducting a further investigation, Officer Montoya arrested Morrison.
¶5 Morrison called his brother, Rick, from jail. At the beginning of the call, Morrison was informed that the call would be recorded and monitored, and if "the call is in place to legal counsel, " to hang up and notify the sheriff's office. While relaying incriminating information, Morrison asked Rick to contact an attorney on his behalf.
¶6 At trial, Morrison moved to exclude the entire recording of the conversation from evidence because he disclosed information while attempting to persuade Rick to call an attorney. He further argued that the recording should be excluded pursuant to Arizona Rules of Evidence 401, 402, 403, and ...