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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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.

DIODORO CORTINA, JR., Appellant.

No. 1 CA-CR 16-0877

Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR2015-155194-001 

The Honorable Bradley H. Astrowsky, Judge

AFFIRMED

COUNSEL

Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix

By Joseph T. Maziarz 

Counsel for Appellee

Maricopa County Public Defender's Office, Phoenix

By Lawrence S. Matthew

Counsel for Appellant

FILED 11-14-2017
STATE v. CORTINA

Decision of the Court

2

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Judge Michael J. Brown delivered the decision of the Court, in which 

Presiding Judge Diane M. Johnsen and Judge Jennifer B. Campbell joined.

B R O W N, Judge:

¶1 Diodoro Cortina, Jr. appeals his convictions and sentences for 

possession or use of narcotic drugs and possession of drug paraphernalia. 

Cortina's counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 

U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297 (1969), advising that after 

searching the record on appeal, he found no meritorious grounds for 

reversal. Cortina was given the opportunity to file a supplemental brief but 

did not do so. 

¶2 Our obligation is to review the entire record for reversible

error. See State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, 537, ¶ 30 (App. 1999). We view the 

facts in the light most favorable to sustaining the conviction and resolve all

reasonable inferences against Cortina. State v. Guerra, 161 Ariz. 289, 293

(1989). 

¶3 On October 21, 2014, Officer Merkel recognized Cortina as 

having an outstanding arrest warrant so he placed Cortina under arrest. 

Merkel searched Cortina incident to the arrest and found in his backpack 

two syringes, a spoon with black burn marks, a plastic container with a 

razor blade, a piece of cotton, a lighter, and black tar heroin in Cortina’s 

backpack. Cortina later admitted that the heroin in his backpack was worth 

three to five dollars, and that he planned to use the heroin to keep from 

getting sick. The items Merkel found in Cortina’s backpack were consistent 

with the intravenous use of heroin. A forensic scientist tested the substance,

confirmed it was heroin, and found it weighed 0.11 grams, a usable quantity 

of heroin. 

¶4 A jury found Cortina guilty of possession or use of narcotic 

drugs, a class 4 felony, and possession of drug paraphernalia, a class 6 

felony. The superior court imposed a mitigated, concurrent sentence of 

eight and one-half years for the class 4 felony and three years for the class 6 

felony, with credit for 240 days presentence incarceration credit. This 

timely appeal followed. 
STATE v. CORTINA

Decision of the Court

3

¶5 After a thorough review of the record, we find no reversible 

error. See Clark, 196 Ariz. at 541, ¶ 50. The record reflects Cortina was

represented by counsel at all stages of the proceedings against him. Except 

for a brief period when the superior court answered a jury question, at 

which counsel waived Cortina's presence, Cortina was present at all critical 

stages. The evidence presented supports that the convictions and the 

sentences imposed fall within the range permitted by law. As far as the 

record reveals, these proceedings were conducted in compliance with 

Cortina's constitutional and statutory rights and the Arizona Rules of 

Criminal Procedure. We therefore affirm the convictions and the resulting 

sentences. 

¶6 Defense counsel's obligations pertaining to Cortina's 

representation in this appeal have ended. Counsel need do no more than 

inform Cortina of the outcome of this appeal and his future options, 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). On the court's own motion, Cortina has 30 days 

from the date of this decision to proceed, if he wishes, with a pro per motion 

for reconsideration. Cortina has 30 days from the date of this decision to 

proceed, if he wishes, with a pro per petition for review.