State v. Robles

In State v. Robles, 213 Ariz. 268,12, 141 P.3d 748, 752 (App. 2006), the Court addressed virtually the same issue Solis now raises on appeal. 213 Ariz. 268,11, 141 P.3d at 752. In that case, we explained that "the focus in Hauss was on the need for reliable documentary evidence, rather than merely testimonial evidence (with its potential 'credibility contests' and 'unfairness to defendants'), to substantiate the fact of a prior conviction." Id.15, State v. Hauss, 140 Ariz. 230, 231, 681 P.2d 382, 383 (1984) (alteration in Robles). The Court concluded that "when, as here, the trial court's finding of prior convictions is primarily based on such documentary evidence, the concerns expressed in Hauss about 'non-documentary evidence being offered to establish the fact of a prior conviction' are dissipated." Id., quoting Hauss, 140 Ariz. at 232, 681 P.2d at 384 (alteration in Robles). Thus, the Court stated, "Although the preferred method of proving prior convictions for sentence-enhancement purposes is submission of certified conviction documents bearing the defendant's fingerprints, courts may consider other kinds of evidence as well." Id.16. The Court noted that our supreme court had accepted a commitment record as sufficient proof of a defendant's prior conviction. Id.