State v. Knapp ( 2023 )


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    UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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.
    SARAH ANNE KNAPP, Appellant.
    No. 1 CA-CR 23-0058
    FILED 8-08-2023
    Appeal from the Superior Court in Yavapai County
    No. V1300CR202280222
    The Honorable Michael R. Bluff, Judge
    AFFIRMED
    COUNSEL
    Arizona Attorney General’s Office, Phoenix
    By Alice Jones
    Counsel for Appellee
    Michael J. Dew Attorney at Law, Phoenix
    By Michael J. Dew
    Counsel for Appellant
    STATE v. KNAPP
    Decision of the Court
    MEMORANDUM DECISION
    Presiding Judge Paul J. McMurdie delivered the Court’s decision, in which
    Judge Michael J. Brown and Judge Michael S. Catlett joined.
    M c M U R D I E, Judge:
    ¶1             Sarah Anne Knapp appeals her conviction of criminal
    trespass and the resulting sentence. Knapp’s counsel filed a brief per Anders
    v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967), and State v. Leon, 
    104 Ariz. 297
     (1969),
    certifying that, after a diligent search of the record, he found no arguable
    question of law that was not frivolous. Knapp was allowed to file a
    supplemental brief, but she did not do so. Counsel asks this court to search
    the record for arguable issues. See Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
     (1988); State v.
    Clark, 
    196 Ariz. 530
    , 537, ¶ 30 (App. 1999). After reviewing the record, we
    affirm Knapp’s conviction and sentence.
    FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
    ¶2           In December 2021, Knapp was living out of her car. When her
    car broke down one day in Sedona, she went to a local inn. Knapp found an
    unlocked door, entered the unoccupied room, and fell asleep on the bed.
    She was eventually awakened by the room’s renters, who screamed when
    they returned to the room and found her there. Knapp left in a panic
    without explaining her presence to the renters or the inn manager. Police
    found Knapp in her car near the inn and issued her a citation.
    ¶3           A grand jury indicted Knapp on one count of first-degree
    criminal trespass, a Class 6 felony, and two counts of misdemeanor
    disorderly conduct. The misdemeanor counts were later dismissed. The
    jury found Knapp guilty of criminal trespass, and the court sentenced
    Knapp to a mitigated term of 0.33 years’ imprisonment with 36 days of
    presentence incarceration credit.
    ¶4            Knapp appealed.
    DISCUSSION
    ¶5           We have read and considered counsel’s brief and have
    reviewed the record for arguable issues. See Leon, 
    104 Ariz. at 300
    . We find
    none.
    2
    STATE v. KNAPP
    Decision of the Court
    ¶6            Knapp was present and represented by counsel at all stages
    of the proceedings against her. The record reflects the superior court
    afforded Knapp all her constitutional and statutory rights and conducted
    the proceedings following the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure. The
    court held appropriate pretrial hearings, and the evidence presented at trial
    and summarized above was sufficient to support the jury’s verdict. Knapp’s
    sentence falls within the range prescribed by law, with proper credit given
    for presentence incarceration.1
    CONCLUSION
    ¶7            Knapp’s conviction and sentence are affirmed. After the filing
    of this decision, defense counsel’s obligations pertaining to Knapp’s
    representation in this appeal will end after informing Knapp of the outcome
    of this appeal and her future options unless counsel’s review reveals an
    issue appropriate for submission to the Arizona Supreme Court by petition
    for review. See State v. Shattuck, 
    140 Ariz. 582
    , 584–85 (1984).
    AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court
    FILED:    JT
    1      Any alleged error in Knapp’s sentence would be moot because
    Knapp has presumably completed her sentence. See State v. Peters, 
    110 Ariz. 316
    , 317 (1974) (issue relating to legality of sentence rendered moot by
    passage of time).
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 1 CA-CR 23-0058

Filed Date: 8/8/2023

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/8/2023