State v. Kroll

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UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL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

JOSEPH AARON KROLL, Appellant.

No. 1 CA-CR 23-0415
FILED 11-19-2024

Appeal from the Superior Court in Mohave County
No. S8015CR202300065
The Honorable Derek C. Carlisle, Judge

AFFIRMED

COUNSEL

Arizona Attorney General’s Office, Phoenix
By Alice Jones
Counsel for Appellee

Janelle A. Mc Eachern, Attorney at Law, Chandler
By Janelle A. Mc Eachern
Counsel for Appellant
 STATE v. KROLL
Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Jennifer B. Campbell delivered the decision of the Court,
in which Judge Kent E. Cattani and Judge Paul J. McMurdie joined.

C A M P B E L L, Judge:

¶1 This appeal is presented to us pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and State v. Leon, 104 Ariz. 297 (1969). Defense counsel
has searched the record on appeal and advised us there are no meritorious
grounds for reversal. Defendant Joseph Kroll was given the opportunity to
file a supplemental brief but did not do so. Our obligation is to review the
entire record for reversible error, State v. Clark, 196 Ariz. 530, 537, ¶ 30 (App.
1999), viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining Kroll’s
conviction and resolving all reasonable inferences against him, State v.
Guerra, 161 Ariz. 289, 293 (1989). Having reviewed the entire record, we find
no reversible error and affirm the conviction and sentence.

BACKGROUND

¶2 On January 14, 2023, police officers pulled over a silver
minivan on Highway 95 in Bullhead City because an object was hanging
from the rearview mirror. Claudia Evans was driving, and Kroll was riding
in the passenger seat. When Evans stepped out of the minivan, officers saw
drug paraphernalia on the driver’s seat. Based on probable cause, the
officers searched Evans and located three cell phones. Officers then asked
Kroll to get out of the vehicle and saw a handgun clipped to his belt. Upon
removal of the firearm, the officers noticed that its serial number had been
scratched off. When conducting a search of the minivan, officers found
plastic bags containing thousands of blue fentanyl pills under the driver’s
seat. They also found more drug paraphernalia and what an officer
described as a “drug ledger” in the driver’s side compartment.

¶3 Officers questioned Kroll, who admitted that he was taking
30 fentanyl pills per day and that he traveled to Phoenix at least once a week
to obtain pills. He said Evans picked him up from his home in Bullhead City
and drove them to Phoenix, where they purchased the pills, and they were
pulled over on the way back. He stated that, when they returned, he was
going to pay Evans for a small portion of the pills to use himself. He claimed

2
 STATE v. KROLL
Decision of the Court

that the handgun belonged to Evans, and he was holding it for her at the
time of the traffic stop.

¶4 The State charged Kroll with transportation of narcotic drugs
for sale, a class 2 felony; misconduct involving weapons (possessing a
deadly weapon as a prohibited possessor), a class 4 felony; and misconduct
involving weapons (possessing a defaced deadly weapon), a class 6 felony.
See A.R.S. §§ 13-3408(A)(7), (B)(7), -3102(A)(4), (7), (M). During trial, the
State presented testimony from the police officers who conducted the traffic
stop and searched the minivan. The State also presented photos of the pills,
photos of the handgun, bodycam footage of the traffic stop, and video of
Kroll’s interview. The parties stipulated that Kroll was a prohibited
possessor. At the close of the State’s case, the superior court denied Kroll’s
motion for judgment of acquittal under Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure
20(a).

¶5 The jury could not reach a verdict on the transportation of
narcotics for sale count, and the court declared a mistrial on that count. The
jury found Kroll guilty of misconduct involving weapons (prohibited
possessor) and not guilty of misconduct involving weapons (defaced
weapon). At the sentencing hearing, the State presented evidence of Kroll’s
felony convictions within the last 10 years, and the court found that he was
a category 3 repetitive offender. See A.R.S. § 13-703(C). The court sentenced
Kroll to the presumptive term of 10 years’ imprisonment with 97 days
presentence incarceration credit. See A.R.S. §§ 13-703(J), -3102(A)(4), (M).
He timely appealed.

DISCUSSION

¶6 After a thorough review of the record, we find no reversible
error. See Clark, 196 Ariz. at 537, ¶ 30. The record reflects Kroll was present
and represented by counsel at all critical stages of the proceedings. The
evidence presented supports the conviction, and the sentence imposed falls
within the range permitted by law. Based on the record on appeal, these
proceedings were conducted in compliance with the Arizona Rules of
Criminal Procedure and Kroll’s constitutional and statutory rights.
Therefore, we affirm Kroll’s conviction and sentence.

¶7 Unless defense counsel finds an issue that may be
appropriately submitted to the Arizona Supreme Court, her obligations are
fulfilled once she informs Kroll of the outcome of this appeal and his future
options. See State v. Shattuck, 140 Ariz. 582, 584–85 (1984). Kroll has 30 days
from the date of this decision to proceed, if he wishes, with a pro per

3
 STATE v. KROLL
Decision of the Court

petition for review. See Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.21(b)(2)(A). On the court’s own
motion, Kroll has 30 days from the date of this decision to file a motion for
reconsideration. See Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.20(c).

AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court
FILED: AGFV

4