NOTICE: NOT FOR PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE

LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee,

v.

BRYAN GENE FELIX, Appellant.

No. 1 CA-CR 13-0540

Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR2012-157059-001

The Honorable William L. Brotherton, Jr., Judge

AFFIRMED

COUNSEL

Arizona Attorney General’s Office, Phoenix

By Joseph T. Maziarz

Counsel for Appellee

Maricopa County Public Defender, Phoenix

By Charles R. Krull

Counsel for Appellant
STATE v. FELIX

Decision of the Court

2

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Judge Jon W. Thompson delivered the decision of the Court, in which 

Presiding Judge Randall M. Howe and Judge Michael J. Brown joined.

T H O M P S O N, Judge:

¶1 This case comes to us as an appeal under Anders v. California, 

386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297, 451 P.2d 878 (1969). 

Counsel for Bryan Gene Felix (defendant) has advised us that, after 

searching the entire record, he has been unable to discover any arguable 

questions of law and has filed a brief requesting this court conduct an 

Anders review of the record. Defendant has been afforded an opportunity 

to file a supplemental brief in propria persona, but he has not done so. 

¶2 On the evening of April 17, 2012, fifteen year old victim M.M. 

was sitting on her mattress in her parents’ trailer home when she heard 

gunshots. Home alone and fearful that a gunman was going to enter the 

house and “finish the job,” M.M. hid in the bathroom. M.M.’s grandmother, 

who lived just up the street, heard the gunshots and saw a white Jeep speed 

past. Wanting to make sure everything was okay, the grandmother went 

to the trailer and discovered M.M. They called 911. 

¶3 M.M.’s father, G.M., arrived soon thereafter. Upon hearing 

that a white Jeep was involved, G.M. told the sheriff’s officers that he “knew 

automatically . . . who did it.” G.M. led officers to defendant’s house, where 

a white Jeep was parked and defendant stood outside with a gun in his 

hand. 

¶4 Four shell casings were recovered on the road outside of the 

home and three bullets penetrated the walls. Investigation revealed the 

bullets damaged water pipes, and, in one case, completely passed through 

the mattress M.M. was sitting on during the shooting. A ballistics test and 

a gunshot residue test showed, respectively, that the bullets matched the 

gun defendant was holding when officers arrived, and that defendant had

evidence of gunshot residue on him. 

¶5 The state charged defendant with one count of discharge of a 

firearm at a structure, a class 2 dangerous felony; one count of 

endangerment (death), a class 6 dangerous felony; and one count of 
STATE v. FELIX

Decision of the Court

3

disorderly conduct, a class 6 dangerous felony. A jury convicted defendant 

of all offenses. The trial court sentenced defendant to an aggravated term 

of 12 years imprisonment for count one, an aggravated term of 2.5 years 

imprisonment for count two and an aggravated term of 2.5 years 

imprisonment for count three, all to be served concurrently. The trial court 

gave defendant 250 days of presentence incarceration credit. 

¶6 We have read and considered defendant’s Anders brief, and 

we have searched the entire record for reversible error. See Leon, 104 Ariz. 

at 300, 451 P.2d at 881. We find none. All of the proceedings were conducted 

in compliance with the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, and the 

sentence imposed was within the statutory limits. Pursuant to State v. 

Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582, 584-85, 684 P.2d 154, 156-57 (1984), defendant’s 

counsel’s obligations in this appeal are at an end. Defendant has thirty days 

from the date of this decision in which to proceed, if he so desires, with an 

in propria persona motion for reconsideration or petition for review. 

¶7 We affirm the convictions and sentences.