State v. Champagne ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                      NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.
    UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL
    AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.
    IN THE
    ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS
    DIVISION ONE
    STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee,
    v.
    ALAN MATTHEW CHAMPAGNE, Appellant.
    No. 1 CA-CR 14-0320
    FILED 2-10-2015
    Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
    No. CR2012-048079-001
    The Honorable Karen L. O'Connor, Judge
    CONVICTIONS AFFIRMED; SENTENCES CORRECTED
    COUNSEL
    Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix
    By Michael T. O'Toole
    Counsel for Appellee
    Maricopa County Public Defender's Office, Phoenix
    By Thomas K. Baird
    Counsel for Appellant
    STATE v. CHAMPAGNE
    Decision of the Court
    MEMORANDUM DECISION
    Judge Diane M. Johnsen delivered the decision of the Court, in which Judge
    Donn Kessler and Judge Kenton D. Jones joined.
    J O H N S E N, Judge:
    ¶1             Alan Matthew Champagne was convicted of one count of
    kidnapping, a Class 2 felony; one count of misconduct involving weapons,
    a Class 4 felony; 24 counts of attempted first-degree murder, Class 2
    felonies; 24 counts of aggravated assault, Class 2 felonies, and one count of
    discharge of a firearm at a structure, a Class 3 felony.1 On appeal,
    Champagne does not dispute his convictions but argues this court should
    modify the written sentencing order to conform to the superior court's oral
    pronouncements at sentencing. The State confesses error, agreeing that the
    sentencing order should be amended to reflect the intent of the court when
    it orally pronounced sentence.
    ¶2            Review of the sentencing order and the sentencing transcript
    confirms that the sentencing order does not reflect the sentences the court
    orally imposed. "When there is a discrepancy between the oral sentence
    and the written judgment, the oral pronouncement of sentence controls."
    State v. Hanson, 
    138 Ariz. 296
    , 304-05, 
    674 P.2d 850
    , 858-59 (App. 1983).
    Therefore, we affirm Champagne's convictions but modify the sentencing
    order only insofar as the following:
    ¶3           The sentences for the convictions on Count 2 (28 years) and
    Count 3 (12 years) shall be consecutive to each other;
    ¶4              The sentences for the convictions on Counts 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14,
    16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 40, 42, 44, 46, 48 and 50 (28 years
    1       Although the minute entry order labeled the count of discharge of a
    firearm at a structure as a Class 2 felony, the indictment, oral
    pronouncement of sentence and term of sentence clarify that Champagne
    was charged and convicted of knowingly discharging a firearm at a
    nonresidential structure, a Class 3 felony. See Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-1211(B)
    (2012).
    2
    STATE v. CHAMPAGNE
    Decision of the Court
    each) shall be consecutive to each other and consecutive to the sentences for
    Counts 2 and 3;
    ¶5            The sentence for the conviction on Count 5 (28 years) shall be
    concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 4, and consecutive
    to each of the other sentences;
    ¶6            The sentence for the conviction on Count 7 (28 years) shall be
    concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 6 and consecutive
    to each of the other sentences;
    ¶7            The sentence for the conviction on Count 9 (28 years) shall be
    concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 8, and consecutive
    to each of the other sentences;
    ¶8           The sentence for the conviction on Count 11 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 10, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶9           The sentence for the conviction on Count 13 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 12, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶10          The sentence for the conviction on Count 15 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 14, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶11          The sentence for the conviction on Count 17 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 16, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶12          The sentence for the conviction on Count 19 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 18, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶13          The sentence for the conviction on Count 21 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 20, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶14          The sentence for the conviction on Count 23 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 22, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    3
    STATE v. CHAMPAGNE
    Decision of the Court
    ¶15          The sentence for the conviction on Count 25 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 24, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶16          The sentence for the conviction on Count 27 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 26, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶17          The sentence for the conviction on Count 29 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 28, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶18          The sentence for the conviction on Count 31 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 30, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶19          The sentence for the conviction on Count 33 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 32, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶20          The sentence for the conviction on Count 35 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 34, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶21          The sentence for the conviction on Count 37 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 36, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶22          The sentence for the conviction on Count 39 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 38, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶23          The sentence for the conviction on Count 41 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 40, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶24          The sentence for the conviction on Count 43 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 42, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶25          The sentence for the conviction on Count 45 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 44, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    4
    STATE v. CHAMPAGNE
    Decision of the Court
    ¶26          The sentence for the conviction on Count 47 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 46, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶27          The sentence for the conviction on Count 49 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 48, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶28          The sentence for the conviction on Count 51 (28 years) shall
    be concurrent with the sentence on the conviction on Count 50, and
    consecutive to each of the other sentences;
    ¶29          The sentence for the conviction on Count 52 (20 years) will be
    consecutive to the sentences on all of the other counts.
    ¶30          In all other respects, we affirm the written sentencing order.
    :ama
    5
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 1 CA-CR 14-0320

Filed Date: 2/10/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 2/10/2015