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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE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 

## A RIZONA 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEALS

D IVISION O NE

STATE OF ARIZONA
, Appellee
,

v.

JONATHAN JAMAL JONES
, Appellant

.

No. 1 CA

- CR 17

- 0655

Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR2017

- 108432

- 001 SE The Honorable Jacki Ireland
, Judge Pro Tempore

AFFIRMED

COUNSEL
Arizona Attorney General’s Office , Phoenix By Joseph T. Maziarz Counsel for Appellee

Maricopa County Public Defender’s Office
, Phoenix By Joel M. Glynn C ounsel for Appellant FILED 6-28-2018STATE v. JONES Decision of the Court

2 MEMORANDUM DECISION
Presiding Judge Maria Elena Cruz delivered the decision o f the Court, in which Judge Jennifer B. Campbell and Judge James P. Beene joined.

C R U Z , Presiding Judge:

¶1 This appeal is filed in accordance with Anders v. California
, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Leon
, 104 Ariz. 297 (1969). Counsel for Jonathan Jamal Jones has advised this Court that counsel found no arguable questions of law and asks us to search the record for fundamental error. Jones was convicted of disorder ly conduct . Jones was given an opportunity to file a supplemental brief in propria persona ; he has not done so. After reviewing the reco rd, we affirm Jones’ conviction and sentence

.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶2 We view the facts in the light most favor able to sustaining the judgment and resolve all reasonable inferences against Jones. See State v. Fontes , 195 Ariz. 229, 230, ¶ 2 (App. 1998)

. ¶3 On December 10 , 2016, Jones checked himself into Honor Health Osborn Medical Center for stomach pains. On December 11, during the course of receiving treatment, Jones s tarted to swear, yell, and otherwise disrupt hospital staff and other patients

. Security officers R.H., L.S., and security supervisor J.S. were called to calm Jones down. During the altercati on, Jones placed his hand , holding his cell phone, in R.H.’s face
, causing R.H. to remove Jones’ hand and cell phone from his face . Jones claimed R.H. assaulted him, which resulted in sec urity staff calling police per h ospital policy

. Throughout the enco unter, Jones swore, yelled , and was belligerent and abrasive to staff. Jones then removed an IV from his arm and attempted to leave the hospital, against the medical advice of the

nurses.
¶4 Security supervisor J.S. escorted Jones to the first floor, where h e was met by police. Jones continued to swear and yell, and refused to provide his name. Due to his behavior, police officer s C.L. , G.M., and Sergeant C.D.
, arrested Jones. While attempting to place Jones in a patrol car, Jones kicked C.D . in the leg.STATE v. JONES Decision of the Court

3 ¶5 Jones was charged with one count of aggravated assault, a Class 5 felony, against a peace officer, and one count of disorderly conduct, a Class 1 misdemeanor.

¶6 At trial
, t he hospital security officers testified that Jones swore, yelled, and was verbally abu sive, disrupting other patients , staff, and hospital visitors. The officers testified they attempted to calm Jones down but that Jones was uncooperative. Security officer R.H. testified that Jones’ hand came with in an inch or two of his face.

¶7 Officer C.L . testified he responded to Honor Health for a disturbance. C.L. testified Jones refused to give him his name, and continued to be disruptive and swear. Sergeant C.D. testified that Jones swore loudly. Both C.L. and C.D. testified that Jones kicked C.D.
, t hough C.D. stated the kick left no bruise or injury, C.L. testified he did not believe the kick was strong enough to have any force behind it, and officer G.M. testified he believed he witnessed Jones lose his balance rather than kick C.D.

¶8 Jones testified he was upset with hospital staff because he was in pain, admitted to cursing and yelling , and stated that hospital security assaulted him by grabbing his phone and told him he had to leave. Jones testified he did not kick Sergeant C.D., but that he only reacted involuntarily when the office rs were trying to restrain him.

¶9 At the close of the State’s case, Jones moved for a judgment of acquittal, which was denied. T he jury found Jones not guilty as to count one, aggravated assault, but guilty as t o count two, disorderly conduct. The superior court conducted the sentencing hearing in compliance with Jones’ constitutional rights and Arizon a Rule of Criminal Procedure 26, and sentenced Jones to twelve months’ supervised probation

. ¶10 Jones timely appeal ed. We have jurisdiction pursuant to Article 6, Section 9
, of the Arizona Constitution , and A rizona Revised Statutes sections 12

- 120.21, 13

- 4031, and

- 4033.

DISCUSSION

¶11 We review Jones’ conviction and sentence for fundamental

error. See State v. Flores
, 227 Ariz. 509, 512, ¶ 12 (App. 2011). Counsel for Jones has advised this Court that after a diligent search of the entire record, counsel has found no arguable question of law. We have read and considered counsel’s brief and fully reviewed the record for reversible

error, see Leon , 104 Ariz. at 300, and find none. The record reveals counselSTATE v. JONES Decision of the Court

4 represented Jones at all stages of the proceedings, and a ll of the proceedings were conducted in compliance with the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure. We decline to order briefing and affirm Jones’ conviction and
sentence

. ¶12 Upon the filing of this decision, defense counsel shall inform Jones of the status of the appeal and of his future options. Counsel has no further obligations unless, upon review, counsel finds an issue appropriate for submission to the Arizona Supreme Court by petition for review. See State v. Shattuck
, 140 Ariz. 582, 584

- 85 (1984). Jones shall have thirty days from the date of this decision to proceed, if he desires, with a pro per motion for reconside ration or petition for review.

CONCLUSION

¶13 For the foregoing reaso ns, we affirm Jones’ conviction and
sentence

.