State v. Thomas
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SNOW, J.
¶ 1 Marcel Barry Thomas appeals his convictions and sentences for the possession of dangerous drugs for sale, narcotics, drug paraphernalia, and marijuana. His lawyer found no arguable ground for reversal and filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Anders requires us to search the record for reversible error. Id. at 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396. We find no fundamental error pertaining to Thomas’s convictions. However, we ordered supplemental briefing on an issue pertaining to Thomas’s sentencing. Because we conclude that…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Zamora v. ReinsteinArizona Supreme Court · 1996
- State v. HannahArizona Supreme Court · 1980
- State v. WagstaffArizona Supreme Court · 1990
- Walker v. City of ScottsdaleCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1989
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Yollin v. City of GlendaleCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2008
- State v. ThomasArizona Supreme Court · 2008
- State v. ThomasCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2008