State v. Brown

── State v. Brown ── Court: Court of Appeals of Arizona Date: April 30, 2026 Category: General 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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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. DUSTIN KEITH BROWN, Appellant. No. 1 CA-CR 25-0157 FILED 04-30-2026 Appeal from the Superior Court in Yavapai County No. S1300CR202300164 The Honorable Debra R. Phelan, Judge AFFIRMED COUNSEL Arizona Attorney General’s Office, Phoenix By Joseph E. Begun Counsel for Appellee The Law Office of Michael Alarid III, PLLC, Phoenix By Michael Alarid, III Co-Counsel for Appellant The Law Office of Elizabeth Mullins, PLLC, Phoenix By Elizabeth Mullins Co-Counsel for Appellant  STATE v. BROWN Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Judge Jennifer M. Perkins delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Michael S. Catlett and Judge Angela K. Paton joined. P E R K I N S, Judge: ¶1 Dustin Keith Brown appeals his conviction and sentence on one count of stalking, a Class-3 felony. For the following reasons, we affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ¶2 Brown engaged in the conduct giving rise to this stalking conviction over the course of about ten days in early 2023. Brown, 48 at the time, made romantic overtures to Rebecca (a pseudonym), a 17-year-old convenience store clerk at a gas station he had been patronizing for a while. Rebecca rebuffed his advances, but feeling deeply disturbed, reached out to local police for advice. ¶3 A few days later, Rebecca found a hand-written letter on her windshield that called her degrading names, wished her death by cancer, and, after some sexual commentary, suggested Rebecca take her own life and offered means to assist her in doing so. Rebecca immediately turned the letter over to the police, and Brown later admitted to authoring it. The next day, Rebecca arrived at work to find Brown parked at one of the gas pumps. Soon thereafter, when returning home from a family dinner, Rebecca found Brown parked in the dark in front of her house and immediately called 911. When questioned by law enforcement, Brown claimed he had gotten lost on the way back from the gym. When asked why he parked in front of Rebecca’s house, he retorted he had parked down the block. Taking this as an admission, officers arrested Brown. ¶4 Law enforcement executed a limited-in-scope search warrant for parts of Brown’s home and seized, among other things, boxes of GPS trackers, some empty. This prompted officers to check Rebecca’s vehicle and find two GPS trackers affixed to the undercarriage. Further investigation into Brown’s phone data showed he had been tracking Rebecca’s location and was near her home at the time Rebecca so claimed. The State indicted Brown on a Class-3 stalking charge under Arizona Revised Statutes Section 13-2923(A)(2)(a). 2  STATE v. BROWN Decision of the Court ¶5 Before trial, the State moved to introduce Brown’s prior stalking conviction as other acts evidence to show he acted with “intent, knowledge, had the opportunity, and took steps to plan his crime.” The court held an evidentiary hearing and concluded that the evidence was admissible. Brown moved to suppress the admission of the GPS devices and boxes seized during the search of his home and any data found on any of his electronic devices. The court held another evidentiary hearing an