State v. Jones

1

STATE OF ARIZONA, Appellee, v. RALPH EDWARDS JONES, Appellant.

No. 1 CA-CR 23-0171

Court of Appeals of Arizona, First Division

August 13, 2024

Not for Publication - Rule 111(c), Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court

Appeal from the Superior Court in Mohave County No. S8015CR202200845 The Honorable Richard D. Lambert, Judge

Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix By Joshua C Smith Counsel for Appellee

Jill L. Evans Attorney at Law, Flagstaff By Jill L. Evans Counsel for Appellant

Judge James B. Morse Jr. delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Angela K. Paton joined. Judge Michael S. Catlett concurs in part and dissents in part.

MEMORANDUM DECISION

MORSE Judge

¶1 Ralph Edwards Jones appeals his convictions and sentences for possession of narcotic drugs, possession of drug paraphernalia, and two counts each of disorderly conduct involving weapons and misconduct involving weapons. Jones challenges the sufficiency of evidence supporting the four weapons convictions, and he argues the superior court erred by imposing consecutive sentences for those offenses that occurred on the same date. We affirm.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

¶2 The trial evidence, which we view in the light most favorable to sustaining Jones' convictions, reveals the following. State v. Guerra, 161 Ariz. 289, 293 (1989).

¶3 From April to July 2022, employees at a shopping center in Lake Havasu City occasionally found and collected approximately 20 small taped cylindrical items that were charred at the ends in an infrequently used public parking lot behind a shopping center building and next to an adjacent Walmart ("Parking Lot"). Shopping center employees also noticed that two light poles had burn marks on their concrete bases. Several times, a shopping center security guard heard a "loud boom explosion" from the Parking Lot while he patrolled outside near the Walmart. The shopping center's operations manager feared someone "was experimenting with something" that could cause more serious damage and called the Lake Havasu City police to report the items.

¶4 Officers viewed Walmart's surveillance video of the Parking Lot recorded on June 25 and July 17, 2022. Those videos depicted a white or silver truck approach a light pole at night. The truck momentarily stops when the driver's door abuts the pole's concrete base before proceeding to park in an adjacent lot within view of the light pole. Shortly after, a bright flash of fire erupts from the pole's base followed by a puff of smoke. In the June 25 video, a car parked near the truck pulls out from its parking space and proceeds past the truck towards the light pole when the explosion occurs.^[1] It does not appear that the truck driver attempted to stop or otherwise warn the car's driver of the impending explosion. Other surveillance video from both dates captured Jones smiling as he entered the Walmart alone after the explosions.

¶5 Police eventually identified Jones as a suspect and arrested him on July 22. In Jones' truck, police found homemade improvised explosive devices ("IEDs"), fuses lighters, and electrical tape. The explosive devices were "incomplete," but only because "fuse lines" were not attached. Jones admitted to setting off the devices "at Walmart."

¶6 During a search of a recreational vehicle ("RV") to which Jones had access, police found IEDs in various stages of completion. Police also found items typically used as lethal "fragmentation" when attached to an explosive device, including metal shavings, "BB pellets," and a bag of marbles. During the search, a detective with the Lake Havasu City police department's bomb squad spoke with Jones. Jones admitted to making one of the IEDs. The search also revealed approximately four pounds of explosive material, including "black powder," an explosive compound commonly used in IEDs. Jones also admitted to making the compound and using it in the IEDs he made. See A.R.S. § 13-3101(A)(3) (defining explosive to include "black powder"). Officers confirmed Jones' admissions when they found "priming compound," black powder precursor chemicals, and shipping labels indicating Jones received packages of the chemicals at another RV in which Jones resided. On a nightstand in the bedroom of the RV Jones resided in, police located a glass pipe and a partially burned fentanyl pill on a piece of tin foil. Syringes described as "meth paraphernalia" were found in the nightstand drawer.

¶7 The State charged Jones with six felony weapons counts relating to three separate date ranges and two felony drug counts. Referring to June 25-28, 2022, Count 1 alleged Jones committed misconduct involving weapons by manufacturing, possessing, transporting, selling, or transferring a prohibited weapon, a class 4 felony, and Count 2 alleged Jones committed disorderly conduct while recklessly handling, displaying, or discharging a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument, a class 6 felony.^[2]Counts 3 and 4 charged the same offenses as Counts 1 and 2, respectively, alleging a date range of July 9-13, 2022. Counts 5 and 6, respectively, alleged additional misconduct involving weapons and disorderly conduct charges related to July 17-20, 2022. Count 7 alleged Jones unlawfully possessed a narcotic drug, a class 4 felony, and Count 8 alleged Jones used or possessed to use drug paraphernalia, a class 6 felony.

¶8 At trial, the detective who searched the RV described his training and experience as an expert in explosives. He then described how IEDs function and are constructed, and how they can cause "catastrophic" physical injury, if not death. Specifically, the detective explained how IEDs detonated with a fuse can be especially dangerous. The detective further testified that homemade devices constructed by unlicensed and untrained individuals, such as Jones, are more dangerous than those professionally manufactured under a license.

¶9 Jones testified at trial. He did not deny detonating IEDs in the Parking Lot, and he admitted he was the man in the surveillance videos entering Walmart soon after the explosions on June 25 and July 17, 2022. Jones explained that he and four friends were "trying to make fireworks for the 4th of July celebration," and he denied he "[]ever intended to damage, hurt, or injure anyone or anything at anytime." During cross-examination, Jones displayed a "stick of dynamite" tattoo on his left arm.

¶10 The jury acquitted Jones on Counts 3 and 4 but found him guilty of the remaining charges. The State established that Jones had two prior felony convictions, one of which was historical. See A.R.S. § 13-105(22) (defining "historical prior felony conviction"). The court considered aggravating and mitigating factors as to each count and found they "balance." Accordingly, based on Jones' status as a category two repetitive offender, the court imposed presumptive consecutive sentences as to all counts except for Count 8, which will be served concurrently with Count 7. Combined, the sentences equal 17 years.

¶11 Jones timely appealed. We have jurisdiction under A.R.S. §§ 12-120.21(A)(1), 13-4031, and 13-4033(A)(1).

DISCUSSION

I. Sufficiency of Evidence.

¶12 Jones does not contest the instructions given to the jury. Nor does he argue that A.R.S. § 13-2904(A) is unconstitutionally vague. Jones' sole argument on appeal is that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the convictions. We review a claim of insufficient evidence de novo. State v. West, 226 Ariz. 559, 562, ¶ 15 (2011). Succinctly stated, "the relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt." Id. at ¶ 16 (quoting State v. Mathers, 165 Ariz. 64, 66 (1990)). Sufficient evidence may be direct or circumstantial, and we do "not reweigh the evidence to decide if [we] would reach the same conclusions as the trier of fact." State v. Borquez, 232 Ariz. 484, 487, ¶¶ 9, 11 (App. 2013) (quoting State v. Barger, 167 Ariz. 563, 568 (App. 1990)). "Reversible error based on insufficiency of the evidence occurs only where there is a complete absence of probative facts to support the conviction." State v. Soto-Fong, 187 Ariz. 186, 200 (1996) (quoting State v. Scott, 113 Ariz. 423, 424-25 (1976)).

A. Disorderly Conduct Involving Weapons.

¶13 "A person commits disorderly conduct if, with intent to disturb the peace or quiet of a neighborhood, family or person, or with knowledge of doing so, such person . . . [r]ecklessly handles, displays or discharges a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument." A.R.S. § 13-2904(A)(6).

¶14 Jones argues the State presented insufficient evidence to support his convictions for disorderly conduct with a weapon. Specifically, Jones contends the State did not prove that the area in which he detonated the IEDs (i.e., the Parking Lot) was a neighborhood and no evidence established that the explosions disturbed any specific person. In its answering brief, the State only argues that sufficient evidence established that Jones disturbed the peace and quiet of a neighborhood and does not respond to Jones' argument about individuals.^[3] Jones also argues that the State failed to prove that he had the requisite mental state and that the IEDs were dangerous instruments. The State disputes these arguments.

1. Neighborhood.

¶15 During deliberations, the jury sought clarification from the court as to a definition of "neighborhood." Specifically, the jury asked, "[d]oes the definition of neighborhood include a public parking lot?" Out of the jury's presence, the State suggested that the court provide the definition of "neighborhood" from Black's Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019). Jones'...