Legal Opinion

State v. Thomas

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided January 29, 2008No. 1 CA-CR 05-0770PublishedCited by 3 opinions

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

  1. Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Zamora v. ReinsteinArizona Supreme Court · 1996
  3. State v. HannahArizona Supreme Court · 1980
  4. State v. WagstaffArizona Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Walker v. City of ScottsdaleCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1989

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Yollin v. City of GlendaleCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2008
  2. State v. ThomasArizona Supreme Court · 2008
  3. State v. ThomasCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2008

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API