# State v. Suniga

> Court of Appeals of Arizona · February 5, 1985 · 145 Ariz. 389

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9565199

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. Arthur John SUNIGA AKA Arthur J. Suniga, Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Arizona
- **Decided:** February 5, 1985
- **Citations:** 145 Ariz. 389; 701 P.2d 1197; 1985 Ariz. App. LEXIS 524
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Froeb
- **Judges:** Kleinschmidt, Froeb, Greer
- **Cited by:** 29 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9565199

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding dangerousness finding “implicit” in guilty verdict for aggravated assault by use of a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument
- finding dangerous offense “implicit” in guilty verdict for aggravated assault by use of a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument

## Opinion text

FROEB, Judge,
dissenting:
The first sentence of 10.5 years was in fact less than the presumptive; it was a mitigated term.
In my opinion, that sentence was invalid because the court found mitigating factors which were not legally recognizable. I am unable to agree that either a withdrawn plea agreement or illegal drug usage are mitigating factors under A.R.S. § 13-702(E)(5) which will justify a less than presumptive term.
That being the case, the mitigated sentence could not stand and the trial court properly vacated it under rule 24.3. If it had not done so, the state could have successfully challenged the mitigating circumstances on appeal. See A.R.S. § 13-4032(6).
It follows therefore that the trial court correctly resentenced appellant to aggravated concurrent terms of 11.5 years. I would affirm both the conviction and the sentence.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9565199. Public record. Not legal advice.