Background
On the evening of October 23, 2020, Jeremy Magyar rear-ended another vehicle while driving southbound on State Route 51 in Maricopa County. Despite his vehicle emitting heavy smoke, Magyar fled the scene and pulled into a nearby parking lot. A witness followed him, called 911, and observed Magyar exit from the driver’s door before police arrived approximately 30 minutes later.
Officers noted Magyar had bloodshot, watery eyes, slurred speech, and smelled of alcohol. He refused all chemical testing, so police obtained a warrant and drew his blood roughly two hours and 45 minutes after the accident. Results showed a BAC of 0.087 and the presence of THC. Magyar’s driver’s license was confirmed suspended on the date of the incident.
The State charged Magyar with two counts of aggravated DUI with a suspended license (impaired to the slightest degree and BAC over 0.08), both class 4 felonies, and one count of DUI marijuana with a suspended license. A jury convicted him on both alcohol counts but acquitted him on the marijuana count. The trial court found two prior felony convictions and sentenced Magyar as a category three repetitive offender to concurrent presumptive 10-year terms, crediting him with 713 days of presentence incarceration.
The Court’s Holding
The Arizona Court of Appeals, Division One, affirmed Magyar’s convictions and sentences in full. The appeal arose under the Anders v. California procedure, in which defense counsel certified to the court that he had reviewed the entire record and found no arguable, non-frivolous issues for appeal. Magyar was given the opportunity to file a supplemental brief but declined to do so.
Conducting its own independent review of the entire record — as required under Anders and State v. Leon — the court found no reversible error. The court confirmed that pre-trial and trial proceedings complied with the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, that Magyar was present and represented at all material stages, and that sufficient evidence supported the jury’s guilty verdicts beyond a reasonable doubt. The sentences were imposed within statutory guidelines after the court stated on the record the factors it considered.
Key Takeaways
- An Anders appeal obligates the appellate court to independently review the entire record for reversible error even when defense counsel identifies none; here, that review yielded no grounds for relief.
- A BAC of 0.087 drawn nearly three hours after the accident, combined with officer observations of impairment and a confirmed license suspension, was sufficient evidence to sustain aggravated DUI convictions.
- A defendant with two prior felony convictions qualifies as a category three repetitive offender under Arizona law, triggering a presumptive 10-year sentence on class 4 felonies.
- Acquittal on a related marijuana DUI count did not disturb the alcohol DUI convictions, illustrating that juries may reach independent verdicts on separate charges arising from the same incident.
Why It Matters
This non-precedential memorandum decision is a routine Anders affirmance, but it illustrates the practical ceiling facing defendants whose appellate counsel can identify no colorable legal issue. Once counsel files an Anders brief, the defendant’s only remaining avenue is a pro per supplemental brief — a path Magyar did not pursue — or a subsequent petition for review to the Arizona Supreme Court.
For DUI practitioners, the case is a reminder that post-arrest chemical test refusals do not prevent conviction: a warrant-compelled blood draw taken hours after the incident, combined with eyewitness testimony and officer observations, can independently sustain both the impairment and per se BAC theories of aggravated DUI under A.R.S. § 28-1381(A)(1)–(2).